I’m going to reserve any objections at this point. I haven’t had time to go through the rules thoroughly yet and I’m about to go to work. Give me about 12 hours.
I’m going to go with “no”
You still pretty much limited us to the biggest brakes we can have, we can’t even alter the disc size really to save weight. The rule then should’ve been “that size brakes of these materials” without any braking distances limitations, OR just a braking distance limitation. That way we could have at least played with the combos to get the best weighing solutions for ourselves.
The “265 tire is too tiny, here’s a 275” is exactly like dropping a cup of water on a burning building and hoping it is going to help. Im running a very much untuned 800 hp engine and it’s 33% wheelspin even though the first gear goes way up to 110kph. Your “pro modifieds” will barely run sub 5 second 0-100s, if that’s your main idea then ok, but know that we are using - this
Not drag race radial slicks. These are street legal semi slick tires, those will NEVER have the grip to compete with a 265 drag radial. Either make it properly wide, or be prepared for the down under thunder to be known for beastly 350hp racers and 14 second passes.
That is what it feels like. The limtations are strict and in all the wrong places, so unlike for example AMWEC where you’re building any car “to spec” you’re forced to build “that exact car”
So entrants must create silhouette racers (tube frame and carbon panels) with purpose-built engines… A welcome change from the relative sanity of the contests I’m used to.
So please air your full concerns
That is the exact point I want all these car to be within .2-.3 seconds different when we start it is about working with what you have been given, not what you necessarily would do personally.
Examples
Fuel mixture - without the demand for economy everybody will rich out their mixture as much as possible, in an NA car you can’t actually effectively reach the 12.5 : 1 anyway, so that restriction does not really work at all.
Wheels must me carbon fibre - why? You’ve given us a budget and you’re spending it for us. I maybe wish to spend an extra quality slider on engine, but now I can’t because you’re actually not allowing me to chose my own wheels. Same goes for the body material, i’d rather a fiberglass than carbon fiber, it would save up some cash for other things, but these rules mean “build this exact car that i want, i do not require your car building skills” kind of competition
Brakes - Either just give us teh brakes you want us to have or just give us the required stopping distance. Do not give us both, especially since as you’ve seen, that does not really work. It probably wil now that we’ve got bigger diameter wheels, but it did not work initially.
You want us to use 4 gears sequential or 5 gears manual. That will leave us with pretty much exactly the same weight of the two boxes. If you just add the word “max” to the gearboxes, means we can use a 3 speed manual, it will be slower on shifting, but that will mean we can shed weight off the car to compromise. We can all think of solutions that best fit our tuning styles. Instead everybody is running pretty much exactly the same gearbox. There’s little to no competition there as everyone will just select the best gearing for the quarter.
Suspension setup - what you did there is just waste some of the budget we’ve been given. There is no benefit to progressive springs or adaptive dampers on a launch in a straight line.
The safety - even with all the CF and other things your safety requirement demands an advanced safety setting with +6 quality. There is absolutely no other option, so why not just give us the safety level you want us to have or lower the demand to the level where we get to at least try options of going advanced with - quality or basic with + quality.
In any case this would be a lot easier if you just gave us a ready built car to specs and then said “you may change these and these settings” We aren’t building a car to spec, we are actually building a car you’ve said.
I know you cant reach 12.5 with na that why turbo is an option. And just making the fuel curve as rich as possible doesn’t mean that you will have an advantage one penalty in and everything changes.
That’s the point.[quote=“squidhead, post:28, topic:16355”]
There’s little to no competition there as everyone will just select the best gearing for the quarter.
[/quote]
considering its not just 1/4 racing that is irrelevant
There is plenty of room for safety adjustments and these numbers are not hard to get
And finally I have given you these materials as I KNOW that it will make it difficult with actually putting positive points in sliders and I do not require your building skills otherwise I would have just said put this motor in whatever body you want with a set amount of production points
-
You show me at least 1 person who won’t run 12.5 fuel on turbo when he’s building for power and is allowed to. Hell I might not need to but i WILL , simply cause “one penalty and i might be leaning out, so I’ll run as rich as possible to prevent that”
-
The gearing is actually relevant, you just need to know how. There’s going to be a very specific set of gears that you must use for best result in all of the races.
-
No, there really isn’t much room for safety adjustments, I have just re-checked. It’s either “go extremely over budget on normal safety” or "go advanced safety +6
And i’m out.
In my experience a good set of rules defines the result needed and the restrictions. It does not decide what to use against the builders’ better judgement. The restriction should start restricting the best solutions, not “restrict everything just for the sake of it”. Like I said - you want us to tune a car you’ve built, give us that car you’ve built.
2 Likes
Driver assists do not make a difference in drag (just tested in tulsa)
Not sure if a bumpy slat track will have any correlation with driveability?
I’m willing to give this a shot, but I do think that the first iteration of this type of challenge should have utilized a template car. If that had worked out well, perhaps we could find places to open up the restrictions. I’m not so sure that you’re going to see too much variance in the bodies here. It’s really going to be all about who gets lucky on quality sliders and has the best combination of power and grip by the end of the challenge.
Just +6? I’m having to do more than that just to get there.
I do echo all the concerns above, mainly that we have to do all the groundwork to end up making a car that’s essentially the same (also applies to engines). Definitely would have been worth uploading the cars and the engines and told us what we could actually change to make sure we were compliant. It’s also fine to have certain restrictions but the rules as they are break the unspoken rule (that I articulated in my guide) that they actually interact to implicitly limit the way cars are built, which basically means you have to struggle to meet the rules before realising you only had one way to do it anyway.
Tuning and testing can be exciting for some but it’s very time intensive if you want to take it seriously. I would, but I also don’t have the time.
As for the quality slider business, that’s something that makes sense from a ‘wear and tear’ perspective but from a gameplay perspective it’s honestly a pretty discouraging thing which will encourage counterintuitive gameplay that detracts from the original goals. That’s pretty frustrating and I’d urge one to consider changing the mechanics. For wear and tear mechanics that utilise more aspects of the car, even though they’re far from the same challenge, I’d take a look at how @squidhead balanced the requirements in the Survival of the Fittest.
1 Like
I do take on every bodies idea’s and as such the complete rule set needs to change and I also apologize if at any stage I came across as rude I will look more into this challenge when I have a couple of days off