SCC Old Timer Event - 1972 Ferrari 365 GTS4 Spyder - Sun, Jan 17 - 20:00 GMT

[jjaisli]

Supercar Challenge - Old Timer Event - 1972 Ferrari 365 GTS4 Spyder - Sunday, January 17th, 2010 - Race Results

Once again, a big thanks to all those who took part in the 365 GTS/4 event. In this case, a few less people showed up than I assumed would and many people who wanted to be included in the event weren't on-line during the race. I'm assuming they either forgot or had plans elsewhere. I purposely didn't do much promotion for the last few days both in this thread and by way of PSN messages since the last race was pushing the limit and I had people asking for invites when the lobby was full. This time, we never had more than 10 people in the lobby (although both Bullie & Turnupdaheat had trouble connecting.) Really a shame.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Race No 1 : VIR - 15 Laps - Dry - 2 Lap Qualifying to Precede the Race

Qualifying went much better this time. That is to say, I assume it did. A little domestic disturbance on my one and only flying lap meant I would be relegated to the back of the field. Or so I thought. When the race started, I was rather confused to see I was starting from pole position. I wasn't sure what to do. I had my mic back in the charger and I would have had to get up to reach it. And lining up again would have meant an additional qualifying run which would have been unfair to everybody. And I had no way of knowing who else had a 'red' lap in qualifying. So I just took it but felt a bit ill at east with this decision.

Simcoeace was behind me and made a pass up the inside going into the uphill braking zone before the sharp uphill right hander. I was able to slice back inside behind him, tapping him a bit in the process and making a little contact with Alan behind me. At that point, I was a little confused and wasn't sure if there was another car on my right rear quarter and stuck hard to the left before realizing I was in the clear. Alan was able to get by with a great inside slip stream and pass down the main straight. I tried to give him room into the braking zone and probably over did it, nearly running wide myself

Going through the esses, mhm66 was able to get by me when I went a bit off line before the last double right hander before the main straight. After Henrik got by, chilledant tried to stick his nose up the inside, we made contact, I got a bit off line and couldn't brake for the corner in time and most of the field got by. But realistically, I never should have been in that position to begin with so I didn't fight it. And either way it was just a racing incident.

From that point on, I was able to watch the battle between SimcoeAce and Hun200kmh and at one point, I was able to capitalize on a mistake by Mario and get around him. One thing I'm really at a loss to understand is how I overshot the braking zone for the uphill right hander, allowing Mario to get by again. If you watch the video (publishing later tonight or tomorrow) you can clearly see I brake at exactly the same spot and yet somehow I completely overshoot the braking zone. I'm not in anybody's draft, I'm not off-line, I'm just at a loss to understand it. But from that point on, I just couldn't get close enough to Mario to challenge him again, slowly falling behind here or there after a few mistakes.

Mario managed to get by SimcoeAce and I finished the race about 3.5 seconds behind Biggles. Well done to the top four who all put in very impressive lap times.

Results:
1. AlanG184 - 1:43:16 - 25 points
2. new_soul - 1:43:14 - 21 points *FL
3. mhm66 - 1:43:62 - 16 points
4. ChilledAnt - 1:43:60 - 13 points
5. GTP_Hun - 1:44:32 - 11 points
6. Simcoeace - 1:45.62 - 10 points
7. jjaisli - 1:45:29 - 9 points
8. drivatar - 1:50:77 - 8 points
9. sheffield-untied - RTD (but awarded 7 points based on 70% race distance completed)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Race No 2 : Silverstone - 15 Laps - WET - Reverse Grid from the Previous Race

Starting 3rd on the grid at Silverstone, I had a good start and was able to get by both Drivatar and sheffield-united going into copse. I was thrilled to be able to maintain this lead for the first 2 minutes, before a hard charging mhm66 was able to get by me into Abbey. Silverstone has never been one of my favorite tracks and I knew I would probably struggle for pace here. But what I wasn't counting on was braking for Abbey on lap 4, at the same place I was the lap before, and understeering right off the road, allowing AlanG and Hun200kmh to get by me. I was really pretty angry with myself but, what can you do. I saw new_soul behind me and realized it was probably only a matter of time before he caught me and it proved to be the case. I could almost match him when I was putting in good laps (I had several laps in the low 2:27s but they were all red) but more often than not, a small mistake or a bad line here or there allowed him to make up about 2+ seconds/lap on me. Not much else to say about this race. Most of it I spent running on my own and I was just happy when it was over.

Results:
1. mhm66 - 2:26.44 - 25 points
2. AlangG184 - 2:25.88 - 21 points
3. GTP_Hun - 2:26:49 - 16 points
4. new_soul - 2:26:04 - 13 points
5. jjaisli - 2:28:47 - 11 points
6. simcoeace - 2:30:60 - 10 points
7 drivatar - 2:34:80 - 9 points
8 sheffield-united - RTD


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Race No 3 : Redwood Park (Montreal) - 15 Laps - Dry - 2 Lap Qualifying to Precede the Race

Qualifying seemed to go pretty well this time, although it did appear to take an awfully long time to build the gap. I wasn't thrilled with my lap but I guess considering the way this race turned out, I shouldn't be surprised. Once upon a time, I was actually pretty quick at Montreal. Perhaps it's the pressure to perform at what I see as one of my better tracks but I seem to have botched this race badly, the last few times I've raced here both in SCC and FC. Or at least lets say, when the race counts.

New_soul generously waited for the field to go by at the start in order to put the 'grid' back in proper order. From there, the race just didn't go as planned. My pace wasn't bad but my race was just marred by a series of small errors. And ultimately, I wasn't able to achieve the kind of lap times I wanted. Although I was able to get several laps into the mid 2:00s, all of them were red so it matters very little. It's a shame considering my 'race' pace was nearly .6 seconds beyond what I know I'm capable of. And instead, of eating into his lead, I saw Hun200kmh continuously pull away.

Eventually new_soul was able to get around me and kept it there for 2 laps. He made a mistake on the final lap and braked late at the hairpin and I was able to come up the inside. I didn't realize he was that close to me and I think I squeezed him a little bit and from there we ran side by side, with my car slightly ahead and on the right side of the track, all the way down the back straight. About 200m from the braking zone, I could see I was just ahead of him and decided to move to the left to get a better line into the final chicane. But as I did so, our cars made contact (lag issue) and I saw new_soul hit the wall. I felt very badly about this and realized it probably looked to new_soul that I had tried to either squeeze him or perhaps even deliberately push him into the wall and I assure you that was not my intention. I then slowed down to allow him to take the lead but I was still ahead at the chicane. I tried to go wide because I wasn't sure exactly where he was and got a penalty. It look like at the end, new_soul was trying to slow down for me but I didn't want to take it and allowed him to claim 4th place. Perhaps he has a different take on this incident but that's how I saw it and I thought it was only right to allow him to cross the line first.

Ironically, even though he crossed the line at least a second in front of me, the game awarded the victory to me.

So to me it was clear there was a lag/timing issue between us and that was probably responsible for the incident on the final lap when I tried to move in front of him.

1. AlanG184 - 1:59:34 - 26 points (a new track record?)
2. mhm66 - 2:00:80 - 20 points
3. GTP_Hun - 2:01:10 - 16 points
4. new_soul - 2:00.54 - 13 points
5. jjaisli - 2:01:10 - 11 points
6. Simcoeace - 2:02:00 - 10 points
7. Ghost_dice - 2:02:02 - 9 points
8. Drivatar - 2:04:42 - 8 points *
9. GTP_bullie77 - 2:06.18 - 7 points *

* Unless I'm mistaken, Drivatar and Bullie also commented that their positions were reversed at the finish line.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Final Results:

Back to the top. Proving that random or reverse grids matter little during longer events, AlanG returns to the sweet spot on the podium, with the wind full in his hair.


1. AlanG184 - 72 points
2. mhm66 - 61 points
3. new_soul - 47 points
4. GTP_Hun - 43 points
5. jjaisli - 31 points
6. SimcoeAce - 30 points*
7. drivatar - 25 points
8. ChilledAnt - 13 points **
9. Ghost_Dice - 9 points **
10. GTP_Bullie - 7 points **
11. sheffield-unted 7 points

* Age adjusted = 1,168 points and over-all victory
** took part in only 1 round



Once again, I hope everybody enjoyed themselves and was able to appreciate the 'spirit' of these events and the manner in which they are intended. For the time being, I have to put any future events on temporary hold until I can sort my schedule out. I'll post some video as soon as it's available. Although my camera ran out about 1/2 way through Montreal (unfortunate) and the quality is just awful.


Waiting for the race to start ~ 19:30 hrs

 

[Hun200kmh]

 

[jjaisli]

Does that mean:

A) You approve of the car?
B) You intend to actually show up for this event?
C) You're done for the day and have started drinking?
D) All of the above.
E) A, hopefully B and what the heck, you'll start C.

For what it's worth, I tried to find a pink one in the hopes of satisfying everybody but couldn't.

 

[Hun200kmh]

It means:

A) Definitely. Like that car a lot.

B) That's ALWAYS my intent, but I am not the master of my own destiny

C) I'm done for the day, will drink later

D) Yes

E) In fact. Soon.

I have a question: is this the car we will race using reverse gear-only?

 

[Alan_G]

We did some very good races with this car last week. Immediately I noticed everybody's pace was much closer than with many other cars. I'd say it is better for wheel users than some faster cars (like the 330P4 or 512S/M).

 

[Hun200kmh]

True, didn't remember that, but when we raced this carI could almost lap only 1 second slower than Alan ... at Vallelunga ... wet ... when he was stuck behind GTP_PASM


However, my absolute crown of glory was at this same track, with the 348 Challenge .... where I could lap only 1,5 secs slower than Alan and won the race because he mixed the 100 meters mark with the 200 meters mark.


Come to think of it ... From now on I will only race at Vallelunga

 

[jjaisli]

Hun200kmh;3699793

I have a question: is this the car we will race using reverse gear-only?

I'm under pressure from some to use only gears 1-3. And others, clearly with an agenda, have already PM'd me asking for a lock out of first gear for tracks which go counter-clockwise. Most likely we'll only use odd numbered gears (1-3-5) for even numbered laps and even numbered gears (2-4) for odd numbered laps. Except for the first place car which will have to do the opposite for every 3rd lap unless he laps up to and including an odd numbered car. The exception of course being the car both lapping and being lapped has a black livery. Some people will probably have issue with this combination when cars sporting both an odd and even number pass each other on track but to keep the system moving, I'll push for a compromise where you can't pass on odd numbered car on an even numbered corner (unless it's a double apex). It will work. Unless of course you're using a prime number as your racing number. I'll try and have it all sorted before the race starts.

 

[Hun200kmh]

Hey, I was looking for pictures of the Miami Vice Daytona and I just found out that car was a Corvette !!!!

Anyway, interesting info on wikipedia. It seems old man Enzo got interested in Miami Vice. I can almost hear him saying, in Italian ...

"Piero, go to Miami, take two Testarossas with you, giv'em to Tommy and Tuppence or whatever those two 🤬 are called and MAKE SURE THEY DESTROY THAT TRANVESTITE OF A 365 GTS4! AND I MEAN D-E-S-T-R-O-Y !!!!!!

"Yes, Papa, it will be done as you wish"


And then ... a few weeks later, Il Commendatore watched this on his TV screen:




PS - This is what I found in wikipedia:

Two automobiles drew a lot of attention in Miami Vice; the Ferrari Daytona and Testarossa. During the first two seasons and two episodes of the third season, Detective Sonny Crockett drove a black 1972 Ferrari Daytona Spyder 365 GTS/4.[34] Actually, the car was not a Ferrari, but a kit replica based on a 1980 Chevrolet Corvette C3 chassis.[35] The car was fitted with Ferrari-shaped body panels by specialty car manufacturer McBurnie.[36] Once the car gained notoriety, Enzo Ferrari filed a lawsuit demanding that McBurnie and others cease producing and selling Ferrari replicas, because they were taking his name and styling.[35] As a result, the vehicle lasted until season 3, at which point it was blown to pieces in the season three premiere episode, "When Irish Eyes Are Crying".[34][36] The fake Ferraris were removed from the show, with Enzo Ferrari donating two brand new 1986 Testarossas as replacements.[37]

 

[Alan_G]

Classic.

I really don't see the problem with enforcing defualt setups. This is not about pad vs wheel, or discrimination to pad users or something. It's just about SCC very poor implementation of car setups, where the fastest setup is managable for pad, but probably far too unstable for wheel users. And anybody making the point that using car setups allows for closer racing is simply wrong; it just means people who have more time than others can figure out what makes setups fast. The problem is made a multiple of times worse by the ride height bug.

So I hope you'll go with default setups again.

 

[Hun200kmh]

I'm under pressure from some to use only gears 1-3. And others, clearly with an agenda, have already PM'd me asking for a lock out of first gear for tracks which go counter-clockwise. Most likely we'll only use odd numbered gears (1-3-5) for even numbered laps and even numbered gears (2-4) for odd numbered laps. Except for the first place car which will have to do the opposite for every 3rd lap unless he laps up to and including an odd numbered car. The exception of course being the car both lapping and being lapped has a black livery. Some people will probably have issue with this combination when cars sporting both an odd and even number pass each other on track but to keep the system moving, I'll push for a compromise where you can't pass on odd numbered car on an even numbered corner (unless it's a double apex). It will work. Unless of course you're using a prime number as your racing number. I'll try and have it all sorted before the race starts.

I still think you should be able to pass an even numbered car with an even numbered gear, on a even numbered lap ... IF .... you do it on a even numbered corner.

It's the "AGAINST ALL ODDS" move - a classic in racing - and I don't see any reason why it shouldn't be allowed!

 

[Silver-Sylph]

I might do this possibly. Except i dont know when 20:00 GMT is in Eastern Time. But then again i have no clue what your talking about with these gear things.

 

[arvore]

I still think you should be able to pass an even numbered car with an even numbered gear, on a even numbered lap ... IF .... you do it on a even numbered corner.

It's the "AGAINST ALL ODDS" move - a classic in racing - and I don't see any reason why it shouldn't be allowed!

With these new rules i might even win LOL i was just putting some pressure on Jeff to that 2nd gear thing...

 

[jjaisli]

I still think you should be able to pass an even numbered car with an even numbered gear, on a even numbered lap ... IF .... you do it on a even numbered corner.

It's the "AGAINST ALL ODDS" move - a classic in racing - and I don't see any reason why it shouldn't be allowed!

I'll take it under consideration but only IF the total number of upshifts made during the course of the race is less than 1/3 of the rounded sum of the corners in the race, minus your racing number + the amount of cars you passed during the race. Provided of course the cars you passed were sporting a livery in primary base color. And if you were passed by any car on an odd numbered right hand corner by a car with an odd racing number, points will only count if you spin 360* over the finish line and flash your lights at the car behind you while facing backwards. And I don't think it's too much to ask.

I might do this possibly. Except i dont know when 20:00 GMT is in Eastern Time. But then again i have no clue what your talking about with these gear things.

20:00 hr GMT = 3:00 pm in the buckeye state. And don't worry about the new rules. We're hardly finished. (Or more likely, we're just talking nonsense).

 

[Hun200kmh]

Deal!

 

[arvore]

I'll take it under consideration but only IF the total number of upshifts made during the course of the race is less than 1/3 of the rounded sum of the corners in the race, minus your racing number + the amount of cars you passed during the race. Provided of course the cars you passed were sporting a livery in primary base color. And if you were passed by any car on an odd numbered right hand corner by a car with an odd racing number, points will only count if you spin 360* over the finish line and flash your lights at the car behind you while facing backwards. And I don't think it's too much to ask.


20:00 hr GMT = 3:00 pm in the buckeye state. And don't worry about the new rules. We're hardly finished. (Or more likely, we're just talking nonsense).

I think that the new rules would work perfectly toghether with those big red marks on the tarmac called BREAKING ZONES..he,he

 

[Silver-Sylph]

Atleast the time is perfect for me.

 

[bullie77]

I'll take it under consideration but only IF the total number of upshifts made during the course of the race is less than 1/3 of the rounded sum of the corners in the race, minus your racing number + the amount of cars you passed during the race. Provided of course the cars you passed were sporting a livery in primary base color. And if you were passed by any car on an odd numbered right hand corner by a car with an odd racing number, points will only count if you spin 360* over the finish line and flash your lights at the car behind you while facing backwards. And I don't think it's too much to ask.


20:00 hr GMT = 3:00 pm in the buckeye state. And don't worry about the new rules. We're hardly finished. (Or more likely, we're just talking nonsense).

Don't forget that IF one drives a car which have a odd-numbered chassis, fitted with rain tyres under 40ºcelsius, at night, wearing sun-glass, he does have direct access to pole position, given that he will drive completely naked and singing the The Wizard of Oz main theme in dutch.

👍

 

[bullie77]

Classic.

I really don't see the problem with enforcing defualt setups. This is not about pad vs wheel, or discrimination to pad users or something. It's just about SCC very poor implementation of car setups, where the fastest setup is managable for pad, but probably far too unstable for wheel users. And anybody making the point that using car setups allows for closer racing is simply wrong; it just means people who have more time than others can figure out what makes setups fast. The problem is made a multiple of times worse by the ride height bug.

So I hope you'll go with default setups again.

I agree... and disagree with you!

I agree that there's no problem enforcing default setups to keep things fair, in that matter, because of the setups bug(s). I'm fine with that and it would not be for this that my times will be any worse.

However, theoretically, the use of car setups can in fact turn races more close. I don't mean that an poor average driver like me will be able to 'bite your heels' if he's able to find the best setup, but it can actually made racing more levelled between drivers who are close on defaults. And that would be mainly because you would have the chance to get a car more comfortable and suitable to your driving style, more than pure straight line speed (the height bug).

Take the 250 LM for example and do the test yourself without changing the ride height, and abstain of setting exaggerated camber and toe settings (limit it to, let's say max. value of 1, negative or positive), I'm pretty sure that you'll be able to get better times, simply because you managed to adjust the car to suit better to your driving style, and that will reflect on your times, which, added to consistency, would improved your general perfomance on race. This, ultimately can (and I'm pretty sure it will) set more closed races between drivers of similar level.

I hope you understand what I'm trying to say.

 

[jjaisli]

I understand. But I respectfully disagree.

A true statistician would rubbish this but if you really spend the time and compare the fastest and slowest times from the various events where setups were or were not permitted (considering also that I don't believe anybody was using an altered setup during the first 250TR event), you can see the opposite is true and there is actually a greater disparity between fastest and slowest times where setups were permitted compared to a tighter range when the rules called for stock settings only. Since I have compiled the race points and fastest laps for all these classic events in Excel, it's pretty easy for me to make this statement with some authority.

Now granted this could be because some people chose not to alter their settings or simply didn't have an effective setup. And we can't forget that some cars are easier to set up than others.

All that said, I generally prefer to run events with set up changes allowed. I think it makes the races themselves and the build up in the week before with everybody practicing and testing various setups much more interesting. But it's also very time consuming. And unless you put in the time to work on setup and practice your lines, braking points, turn in points, etc, you're going to be hopelessly off the pace come race day. Mario discovered this during the 250LM event.

And this also leads to another philosophical debate. And that's sharing setup information. If you find a killer setup, do you keep it to yourself. Do you share it with a few select people. Do you share it openly on the forum. If we're going to openly share all setup details on the forum in advance, than one could ask, what's the POINT of allowing setups to begin with. We might as well just run stock settings and level the field. Although settings that work for some people don't necessarily work well for others.

But the main reason I'm leaning toward a stock setup rule for the 365 GTS4 event is two fold.

1. Because I believe the ride height bug makes it all a bit of a travesty. Everybody is simply going to raise their rear ride height to maximum, taking in all of the (unrealistic) benefits and suffering none of the adverse effects of a car with the rear end sticking .5 meter in the air.

2. Because the 365 GTS4 is a road car. And this is just my personal preference but I think it makes more sense NOT to make alterations to the setup of a car which is not really designed to be driven on the track.

Then again, no 365 GTS4 Spyder owner would think of running their car with the top down in the rain. But that might NOT be the case with this event. Stay tuned.

I agree... and disagree with you!

I agree that there's no problem enforcing default setups to keep things fair, in that matter, because of the setups bug(s). I'm fine with that and it would not be for this that my times will be any worse.

However, theoretically, the use of car setups can in fact turn races more close. I don't mean that an poor average driver like me will be able to 'bite your heels' if he's able to find the best setup, but it can actually made racing more levelled between drivers who are close on defaults. And that would be mainly because you would have the chance to get a car more comfortable and suitable to your driving style, more than pure straight line speed (the height bug).

Take the 250 LM for example and do the test yourself without changing the ride height, and abstain of setting exaggerated camber and toe settings (limit it to, let's say max. value of 1, negative or positive), I'm pretty sure that you'll be able to get better times, simply because you managed to adjust the car to suit better to your driving style, and that will reflect on your times, which, added to consistency, would improved your general perfomance on race. This, ultimately can (and I'm pretty sure it will) set more closed races between drivers of similar level.

I hope you understand what I'm trying to say.

 

[bullie77]

I understand. But I respectfully disagree.

And, respectfully disagree with your disagreement

A true statistician would rubbish this but if you really spend the time and compare the fastest and slowest times from the various events where setups were or were not permitted (considering also that I don't believe anybody was using an altered setup during the first 250TR event), you can see the opposite is true and there is actually a greater disparity between fastest and slowest times where setups were permitted compared to a tighter range when the rules called for stock settings only. Since I have compiled the race points and fastest laps for all these classic events in Excel, it's pretty easy for me to make this statement with some authority.

Although I have no doubts this is true, by itself would not prove that what I'm saying is wrong.

You have to consider, to begin with, that there is a great difference of skill between the 'pacl' that normally gathers to run this event. Hell... Alan is easily 5-6 seconds faster per lap, on almost any track, compared to the guys who usually take the last positions (like me). This is skill. It'll maintain either you have default or costum setups.

To see the difference one would have to compared between drivers of similar level. Take as an example, Arvore, Frank and me. When the events allowed for setup changes, I was able to keep more easily to their pace and was common for, between the three of us, change positions during the race. With default setups only, I find it more hard for me to do it ever since.

Could their skill improved? Yes it could. But then I guess their times compared to Alan would also decrease. I think it was the inability to adjust setups in order to get the car more suitable for my driving stile that caused this. On default setups the majority of the cars are pretty much trickier to driver, thus my cornering is much slower than it used to be with costum setups.

Can all be explained by the ride height thing? I honestly don't think so. In fact, I never (if I remember correctly) get rear ride height more than 6 (front 3), since I always look for better grip and stability instead.

Nevertheless, I say again that I have no issues on racing on stock setups and that'll be fine by me. Fairness first 👍.

I am simply trying to explain why do I think that, theoretically, if everyone would be able to change setup to adapt it to their driving style, the races could be more interesting (as in closed between similar skilful drivers).

And this also leads to another philosophical debate. And that's sharing setup information. If you find a killer setup, do you keep it to yourself. Do you share it with a few select people. Do you share it openly on the forum. If we're going to openly share all setup details on the forum in advance, than one could ask, what's the POINT of allowing setups to begin with. We might as well just run stock settings and level the field. Although settings that work for some people don't necessarily work well for others.

I don't find setups, on that matter, to be looked at differently of what you would with racing lines: it's also part of each one's skill to be able to fine tune the car to better suit their style. So, it'll should be "each man by its own" on setups tuning. Also, to reinforce this, as you say correctly, a good setuo to me might not be suitable to you, and vice-versa, due to each of our driving styles.

But the main reason I'm leaning toward a stock setup rule for the 365 GTS4 event is two fold.

1. Because I believe the ride height bug makes it all a bit of a travesty. Everybody is simply going to raise their rear ride height to maximum, taking in all of the (unrealistic) benefits and suffering none of the adverse effects of a car with the rear end sticking .5 meter in the air.

2. Because the 365 GTS4 is a road car. And this is just my personal preference but I think it makes more sense NOT to make alterations to the setup of a car which is not really designed to be driven on the track.

Agree with you on 1), but disagree on 2).

Then again, no 365 GTS4 Spyder owner would think of running their car with the top down in the rain. But that might NOT be the case with this event. Stay tuned.

As if it wasn't slippy enough...

 

[sarrinen69]

jjaisli, how about this? All pad users have to play with there teeth, like Jimi Hendrix. But its ok because the line assist and extreme set-up will guide us around nicely, with absolutely no effort required!

No, wait, i've got a better idea! We'll employ Max Mosely to create the next set of rules!

1) In the next patch, all pad users will be restricted to car of eastern european origin or British Leyland manufacture in the 70's ie:- Wortberg, Trebant, Austin Allegro etc...
2) Wheel users can have any car they want but it will be stuck in 1st gear with a slipping clutch and cross-ply tyres.
3) Anybody caught with a ' personal agenda ' or distaste for the rules will be handed a 100 million dollar fine ( dependant on nationality of course) and will be repeatedly mocked into submission by there compatriot's and anybody else who fancies a 'go'.

 

[jjaisli]

jjaisli, how about this? All pad users have to play with there teeth, like Jimi Hendrix. But its ok because the line assist and extreme set-up will guide us around nicely, with absolutely no effort required!

No, wait, i've got a better idea! We'll employ Max Mosely to create the next set of rules!

1) In the next patch, all pad users will be restricted to car of eastern european origin or British Leyland manufacture in the 70's ie:- Wortberg, Trebant, Austin Allegro etc...
2) Wheel users can have any car they want but it will be stuck in 1st gear with a slipping clutch and cross-ply tyres.
3) Anybody caught with a ' personal agenda ' or distaste for the rules will be handed a 100 million dollar fine ( dependant on nationality of course) and will be repeatedly mocked into submission by there compatriot's and anybody else who fancies a 'go'.

Fair enough, I'll answer this.

- If you want to play with your teeth, it's up to you. No doubt, you'd find a way to set a competitive time. And it might even get you into the Guiness Book of World Records.

- Don't look to Max for help unless your interests lead to high priced call girls. If you feel you can gain an audience, you'll have to speak to Jean-Todt.

1) FWIW, it sounds interesting. I'd have a go in the Allegro. Hey, some GTPers go nuts over the Suzuki Cappuccino (not me ) but why not.

2) So long as we have flexible gear ratios, it's a deal.

3) Now I'm being serious. I take great pleasure in putting these events together. And they've grown far beyond what I ever envisioned them to be. They've grown from hastily thrown together 5-6 people open lobbies to full 16 player private lobbies with others knocking on the door. Believe it or not, a lot of work and preparation goes into these events. I don't just randomly pick a car and a few tracks. I put a lot of thought into the tracks, the conditions, what works and what doesn't what may or may not be interesting and spend a lot of time tabulating results and editing video. What's more, from the time the event starts until I sign off, I'm usually barraged with 40~50 PSN message with questions, comments, complaints and suggestions. And I do my best to listen and respond to each one AND keep the event moving and the lobby running, while people are being kicked out with poor connections and asking for another invite.

Before and after every event, I receive countless suggestions and pleas both from people who take part, who have previously taken part, who wish to take part in the future or in some cases, surprisingly enough, from people who I guess are just lurking the forums and I can't recall ever speaking to them. And some of them offer excellent suggestions. And I try to incorporate as many ideas as possible. But more often than not, many of those ideas conflict with each other.

Case in point being qualifying. Many people had asked for qualifying. And some felt it should be like real world qualifying with the fastest qualifiers first on the grid. Others thought it would lead to a boring event and with no pit stops, strategy or tire wear to consider, the fastest guys would go shooting into the distance and leave little actual racing. So after much consideration, the last event was a compromise where I tried to devise a qualifying system that actually worked (the two lap system with a voluntary gap and colissions off was the best I could come up with) and a first long race with the field in qualifying order. And the a second race in reverse order that would in theory give everybody a good chance and something hopefully fairer than a random grid. It was an experiment to see what worked and what didn't. The result was a disaster but mainly because my PS3 froze during the first event and as such we had to start race two with a random grid.

In any event, my point is, I try to listen to everybody's ideas and if I think there's a practical way to do it, incorporate their suggestions. If you think, particularly with this last race, it makes it all too complicated and confusing, well, honestly, I do also value and consider your opinion as well and I take that into consideration. Perhaps the qualifying was overkill. But we tried it, with mixed results. Would I consider doing it again? Yes, probably. But if enough people, such as yourself, think it's a waste of time, than I will probably drop it.

But your comments via PSN and on TRE forums do not go unnoticed and perhaps it would have been more helpful for your own benefit to join in and see how it works rather than dismissing the idea all together. I would certainly rather you did take part. But, such is your choice.

I apologize if you took offense to the Dragon Poker like commentary regarding fictitious rules and with respect to others in the forum, I doubt others who posted had a real clue what this was all about. In humor, I meant only that it could actually be much more complicated. As somebody who takes part in real world racing events, I'm sure you're fully aware that racing in the real world is decidedly more complex and the rules more intricate than my last event.

 

[Alan_G]

I think it was the inability to adjust setups in order to get the car more suitable for my driving stile that caused this. On default setups the majority of the cars are pretty much trickier to driver, thus my cornering is much slower than it used to be with costum setups.

Can all be explained by the ride height thing? I honestly don't think so. In fact, I never (if I remember correctly) get rear ride height more than 6 (front 3), since I always look for better grip and stability instead.

I only have one opinion, and can't speak for everybody. But I think it's crazy to suggest that the "majority" of the cars are trickier to drive on the default setup. Break it down then; what makes it easier? What do you change in the setup to make it easier to drive?

All of the default setups are soft; soft dampers, springs, anti-roll. Changing any of these to hard may really only make some things more difficult, such as riding bumps, exiting corners on throttle, and especially in SCC using curbs. The first thing I do with a setup in SCC is make everything hard, and work down from there - begin to make things soft if necessary.

The default camber is flat. Increasing the camber angle cannot make it easier. In SCC, from what I can see, it makes it more unstable, especially under braking, and possibly increases braking distances (possibly due to locking brakes, although we never know in SCC).

And the ride height thing is just ridiculous. If you're not running a gap of around 8 or 9 in ride height between F/R, you're losing time. Some people may say they prefer the stability of a more level ride, or different ride suits their "style". Well this is exactly why we shouldn't use setups in these events (at least until they fix the ride height thing). I was doing some TT on Nurburgring with 333SP. I had ride height -1/+8, struggling to get the times I wanted. I changed the rear to +10, and very, very comfortably (not comfortable stability) knocked more than half a second of my previous best. If you don't have this kind of ride height, you're losing time. But it's damn unstable; ridiculously unstable. And without our pad users' auto-correction, we would not be able to handle it, just as wheel users can't handle it.

Bullie, you're saying you look for better grip and stability, rather than the big ride height difference. Well you're throwing away time then. That's exactly why I may be 5 or 6 seconds faster, as you say. At Monza for example, once I tried out the ride height thing, I knocked off around 2 seconds off my time. Many people, such as myself, will continue using these kind of setups. But if you, and others probably (especially wheel users) are not, then you're all at a disadvantage.

I don't have a problem with using car setups in simulations. It can add a very enjoyable element in fact. But they don't work properly in SCC. It's just all over the place. They don't have the physics modelled properly at all; it's just under developed, and under resourced.

 

[Biggles]

Tuning really makes no sense in SCC. In GT5P (& other racing games) where there are mixed car events, the tuning, with the PP system, is supposed to allow racing with different car models, with different performance & handling characteristics while providing a theoretically level playing field. For obvious reasons, the PP system is very hard to implement fairly, & in fact, it doesn't work all that fairly in GT5P, but at least there is a point to it.

In SCC there's really no point to the tuning: it's one model racing, so the only thing tuning is going to accomplish is to give one driver an unfair advantage, or, more likely, give everyone a similar advantage, which brings everything back to where it was to start with, but with weird-looking cars! Unfortunately, the one thing that tuning has accomplished is to mess-up the lap-time leaderboards, which was one of the nice things about FC - every fast lap set while racing registered on the leaderboards.

 

[drivatar]

The fact that in SCC there's only one type of car on the track is very good for playing online. I like it to be purely about driving and not about choosing the right car or setup. Allowing custom setups works against this.
I don't like tuning virtual cars in general and especially if you can use extreme camber but there's no tire wear etc..
Allowing custom setups gives those who invest a lot of time (or have the right friends to share setups) actually two advantages: better skill/experience and a better car. ymmv.

 

[Alan_G]

Perhaps more important at this point, is how we go for the next event:

1) Qualifying? (same as this event) (y/n)
2) Qualifying, but different (y/n/explain)
3) Standard setup or open?
4) Long races or more tracks/shorter?

Myself, I'm leaning towards:
- an opening stage qualifying, same as before
- stock settings (at LEAST until the ride height bug is fixed)
- maybe 3 tracks, 15 laps each.

But I'd like to hear what the rest of you have to say.

- If car setups are not allowed, then I think the same, or similar, qualifying format should be used. Anything except 'Random' is good; I don't like the random grid order because people will always end up being lucky/unlucky. At least with a qualifying (even if the 2nd race is reverse), users have control over their grid positions.

- If car setups are allowed, then I think the grid order should be based on 'Record Lap'. This would encourage people to get out early and practice (which would absolutely reduce collisions and bad driving). Although I love this idea, I think we should go with default setups for all the reasons discussed previously in this topic.

- I wouldn't mind doing 3x15 lap races. But I think that may be too much for some people. We may find a few people only joining for 1 or 2 races. Although, I'm not sure; people can give their input on this.

 

[new_soul]

1) Qualifying? (same as this event) (y)
2) we culd try to make a flying start! the firstlap everybody drives slow and holds position, then after the last corner the leader decides to start the race.
3) Standard setup , + assists alowed
4) Long races! 2x montreal 20 laps 2nd race reverse order start from finishing positions of 1st race.

 

[Hun200kmh]

1) Qualifying? (same as this event) (y/n)
2) Qualifying, but different (y/n/explain)
3) Standard setup or open?
4) Long races or more tracks/shorter?

Myself, I'm leaning towards:
- an opening stage qualifying, same as before
- stock settings (at LEAST until the ride height bug is fixed)
- maybe 3 tracks, 15 laps each.

But I'd like to hear what the rest of you have to say.

1) Yes
2) Not sure how you did it, but I'm all for a 2 lap race, no overtakes in lap 1, build your gaps and go all-out in lap 2.
3) Standard, I wouldn't like to race 365GTS4's turned into SUV cars
4) I like long races, but if you consider past events with 5 races (1x 3 laps, 2x15 laps, 2x 9 laps) I don't think you should just do quali plus 2x20 lap races.

 

[arvore]

Now that the dust seems to have seetle down i think it is possible to have a reosonable discussion regarding the setups matter:

-The ideal outcome is to eutchx providing 1 of the following solutions or iddeally the 3 of them:

*Fix the setup bug (regarding at least ride height and camber but probably also toe)-compromise already assumed by Ferraripro in Eutchx. forum.
*In online racing allowing the host to impose(or not) default setups in a race like it is possible with assists or racing line or even automatic gearing.
*In online racing signeling the players who are using setups,by a blue(yes my favourite color) dot for instance.


-In the present situation in the events to come before these problems are fixed there seems to be 2 diferent questions:

1-Do the extreme setups are more manageble to pad users than to wheel users? :
i can't really tell because i haven't a wheel and the few times i've played scc with a g25 at my friends house we weren't using setups...so i guess it has to be a wheel user(who as always the pad option) to give a try and express their conclusion...

2-Do the default setups imposition in the older time events make the races more tight and close?
In my opinion probably yes,though i prefer racing with setups even the monster trucks ridiculous thing-i've probably got used to them.
This because i think(respectfully disagreeing with Bullie )that default setups
make the car behaviour more unpredictable, and that the faster racers can squezze more "juice" from extreme setups and following your example:

Take as an example, Arvore, Frank and me. When the events allowed for setup changes, I was able to keep more easily to their pace and was common for, between the three of us, change positions during the race. With default setups only, I find it more hard for me to do it ever since.


I really think the battle betwen us 3 was more tighter then before in the events with default setups- and i know the races results give you reason because in previous events where the use of setups was allowed you were able to finish above me and this time not but i think that was more due to the race incidents that occured to me and you in each particullary race than to the use of setups making race betweeen racers tighter and closer- i've noticed in the event and in some praticing sessions that your lap times and frank's also are closer to mine without the use of setups rather when we were using them,maybe because like you've said you use a more conservative-and rational- setup configuration,searching for stability rather than speed,while i (despite the way they make the car look-WTF anyway replays freeze the ps3 ) always go for the monster truck configuration...
And in this event there were several times that you and Franck were closing on me while i think in the events before even when i was behind i could allways close in on you guys and gain time in every lap...
Anyway in the final results of the races i don't think overall it made such a big difference.

I also don't think there isn't any point in tunning in scc(respectfully disagreeing with you now biggles ) but only that this feature is broken due to a bug and when it is fixed things will probably return(or not) to the initial settings,of course that even then the players who are more skilled or have invested more time in tweaking with setups will probably come out with a better tune but thats just life ,no?

So in conclusion i'm foward the setups use inibition during the events(and in the pratice sessions for it unless people in the lobby decide otherwise)until the bug is fixed i hope Jeff will reinstall their use when the bug is fixed,but if most of the racers prefer default setups for events with or without the bug that won't ever be a problem ,for me at least:tup:

 

[frawe]

1) Qualifying? (same as this event) (y/n)
2) Qualifying, but different (y/n/explain)
3) Standard setup or open?
4) Long races or more tracks/shorter?

Myself, I'm leaning towards:
- an opening stage qualifying, same as before
- stock settings (at LEAST until the ride height bug is fixed)
- maybe 3 tracks, 15 laps each.

But I'd like to hear what the rest of you have to say.

1. Qualifying yes
3. Standard setup yes
4. 2x 20 laps