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

  • Thread starter Thread starter jjaisli
  • 147 comments
  • 9,198 views
1. Qualifying yes
3. Standard setup yes
4. 2x 20 laps
👍


Although perhaps I would prefer 3 tracks at 14 or 15 laps each. I feel bad for Alan driving on his own for 45 minutes (& I don't want new_soul to get bored again;))

Riviera seemed a bit of a disaster with the 512S - perhaps because the combination of the 512's suspension, high curbs & track barriers was just too much for (most of us) to deal with over so many laps. You really want a track where screwing up leaves you stuck in the sand, rather than stretched across the track in front of oncoming traffic! :ouch:
 
jjaisli

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) Same format
3)Stock setup(until the bug is fixed for the reasons explained above)
4) 2 races ,15 laps each and plus 2 laps qualifying- i don't know about you guys,probably it's just me getting old but after those 2 20 lap races i was exausted and couldn't look to the screen in the next couple of hours after the event-not to mention the risk of killing Alan out of boredom...
 
I've just purchased this car so i'd like to take part :)

I think stock setups make sense.
 
Regarding Jeff's questions:

1) Yes
2) Same has last event since there's really no other available possible choice for now. Although by the time the setup bug(s) is fixed (if ever...) I feel it should by fastest lap.
3) Stock setups to keep it even
4) More long races! :dopey: (Seriously... 3 x 20 laps with longer rest times between races)


As for setups discussion:

I really am getting the feeling you guys think I'm making a 'war' out of this when, actually, I'm not.

To get it clear:

I am all for the 'stock setups only' in events while the problem isn't fixed.
I merely use the right to disagree to Alan's original post in which he says that its untrue that setup tweaking would give us closer races. I think otherwise, since the ability to tweak the car's setup allow you to get a more comfortable handling, thus more confident, thus (theoretically) faster & consistent.

To arvore: I would disagree however from your opinion, as for my perspective goes. I think we had more tighter races between us then than presently (and I mean closer paces, not discussing the number of times I ended ahead or below you or Frank).

Put it this way, if you like: then I felt that I COULD get to you, finding the right lines, I felt that there was that margin between my lap times and my maximum limits. Now, most of the times, I don't feel that, and in fact I keep struggling to not lose the car, instead of pushing the limit to improve. I did loose that confidence and that margin of progress.

Nevertheless, stock setups are to keep in the events! 👍
 
I appreciate everybody's input. Conditions and details have been added to the first post. :)
 
bullie, didn't you change from pad to wheel recently? Or did you go back to pad?
 
To me, it seems like the tuned set-ups feel completely unrealistic & if you follow a tuned car around the track its movements look unconvincing.
 
I don't see it as a war at all. It's just a normal discussion. Anyone can disagree with anything that anybody says! We both agree that car setups are good in general, but not for SCC, until at least they fix the ride height problem.

But the only point I can't agree with is that using car setups makes the field closer. Like I said previously, all of the default setups are soft ones, and most people would agree that the softer settings are the easiest ("most comfortable") to handle, as you can more easily ride curbs, bumps, get traction, avoid understeer/oversteer etc. If setups are allowed, myself and many others will max them out, whereas most wheel users and some pad users will use varying amounts. So looking at the grid as a whole with setups, it would be more likely to give varying levels of user performance, in my opinion.
 
FWIW, my first experience of the Ferrari 365 GTS 4 came courtesy of the 1976 cult classic movie, "The Gumball Rally". The movie was loosely based on the real (original) Canonball Run or Canonball Baker Sea-To-Shining-Sea Memorial Trophey Dash, run illegally and incognito 5 times between 1971 & 1979, in which during the second running, Dan Gurney and Brock Yates allegedly drove a 1971 Daytona from NY to Los Angeles in 35 hours, 54 minutes.

[YOUTUBEhd]<object width="660" height="525"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/XTT1_JZp2Sg&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&hd=1&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/XTT1_JZp2Sg&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&hd=1&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="660" height="525"></embed></object>[/YOUTUBEhd]

The sounds that Ferrari V12 makes just makes the hair on the back of my neck stand up. :drool:
 
Last edited:
To me, it seems like the tuned set-ups feel completely unrealistic & if you follow a tuned car around the track its movements look unconvincing.


Not sure if it looks unrealistic, but it sure looks very ugly, all cars with their bottom's up 👎


I don't see it as a war at all. It's just a normal discussion. Anyone can disagree with anything that anybody says! We both agree that car setups are good in general, but not for SCC, until at least they fix the ride height problem.

But the only point I can't agree with is that using car setups makes the field closer. Like I said previously, all of the default setups are soft ones, and most people would agree that the softer settings are the easiest ("most comfortable") to handle, as you can more easily ride curbs, bumps, get traction, avoid understeer/oversteer etc. If setups are allowed, myself and many others will max them out, whereas most wheel users and some pad users will use varying amounts. So looking at the grid as a whole with setups, it would be more likely to give varying levels of user performance, in my opinion.

I'm not sure pad users have an advantage in controlling cars with extreme setups, all depends a lot on the driver's way of ... driving. It's funny that I usually find Jeff's setups completely wrong, can't keep his car on the track, and Jeff thinks the same about mine, i.e., he thinks they are undriveable.

Considering we both use wheels (same model and all) that's tells you a lot. We just don't drive the same way, even if the end result (lap time) can be very similar.

Anyway, I agree that forcing everyone to use default setups is good and really does a lotto even the field, providing more exciting, fun racing.

You may remember, Alan, that I used to host lobbies in TRD3 (always liked to be "in command" :D ) and that my lobbies featured, very often, GT Lights, Classic F1 cars Mercedes and touring cars - not DTM, the other class featuring Morgans, among others. It was rare for me to go for the everyone's favourites, the Clio Cup cars. And NEVER I allowed setups. Maybe because I didn't have much time to play, so no time to try and test setups. But the racing was always good, and fun.

I'm not against setups. But, in all honesty, I prefer to race where they are not available. The last GT5P event that made me play that game was a F430 + Suzuka + forced stock setup + N Tyres event. Unbearable for pad users, from what I was told, but it was a blast and I didn't miss setups for a bit.

Anyway, I don't feel (never felt) GT setups to be handicapping to those that don't have much time to test cars. Because gtplanet has an impressive list of tuners that not only excel at their job, but also like and want to share everything they find, and get pride from people using their setups and winning races with them. So, you have all the info you need, and lots of options to choose from. It is not the same in SCC. No tuners exist here and, with a few honorable exceptions, everyone is very secretive about their setups and what they findings are. Honestly, I don't appreciate such behaviour, but of course I respect it.

Back to Bullie, what I think is happening to you (finding it more difficult to be on the race-pace, if I understood correctly) is that you changed from pad to wheel recently. It is not easy to change one's control method (I am sure that if my wheel broke and I was forced to go back to the pad now I would be all over the place) and you will need time to adjust to the wheel. But, if you want my opinion, it's clearly time well spent. Not because you will become faster than you can be with the pad, but because you'll get much more enjoyment from the racing experience the wheel provides.
 
It's funny that I usually find Jeff's setups completely wrong, can't keep his car on the track, and Jeff thinks the same about mine, i.e., he thinks they are undriveable.

It's only because you're shorter. :dopey:
 
@ Mario:

Yes, I had bought myself a wheelstand pro in Christmas, so I now play more often with the wheel. Although, I still continue to play sometimes with the pad due to "logistical" issues (only late night I have the living room at my will and then I assemble to setup... before that I usually play with pad at the kitchen's TV...)

I understand what your saying and I absolutely agree with it, I might say that my best time at Spa with the wheel still is 2 seconds slower than my best on pad, on the 521S on stock setups in both situations (2:23:xxx and 2:21:xxx). However I was making a comparison solely on my pad basis. As an example, I run the 512S event last Sunday on pad, due to my lack of pace and consistency on wheel (still make a lot of mistakes and didn't want to be that much disturb to others).

Nevertheless, the wheel is a must, even if slower, but I feel I'm getting the grips of it. The 365 GTS/4 will DEFINETIVELY by raced on wheel... I love that car on wheel



PS - How do you set your force feedback? I have it at medium, since I feel the low too 'lose' and 'disconnected' and the strong WAAAAY to strong...:crazy:


@ Alan:

I really think that the point of our disagreement is, in fact and in my perspective, one more evidence of what I'm saying from the beginning: It all has to do how does the car feels to a specific driver and the way he drives it. Accordingly to you, the soft (default) setups really fit your driving style - fine! that's good! Me, however, find the cars that are too soft, more unstable and loose and easier to loss control, so for my driving style I found that harder sets are better for me. If I have the chance to get those, theoretically, I'd be more comfortable with it and could faster, thus closer to you :) (ok... I'm dreaming... let's say I wouldn't be so far as I am from you)


@ Jeff:

Great parade of great cars! I see at least TWO that were a MUST in this game: The Jaguar Type E and the (Al)mighty AC COBRA 427.

I've seen the edit on the original post about the details for the event. Since I'm a complete ignorant in this internet technichal stuff, I will hardwire my ps3 for the event, connecting it directly to the router/modem (or whatever is the name of that box with several lights). As far as I understand, this should prevent any issues from my side that would cause me, or others, to be kicked out from the lobby. True?

Regarding the chat box I'm all in for it. I just have a suggestion for you to add to the OP: for the people present in the chat room please avoid writting down messages there after the sync, and PLEASE to respect other drivers and wait for all cars to complete the race before start texting again. It is very distracting and annoying to be concentrate on the race and keep getting this small windows on the top right of your screen with messages being writen in the chat room. Althought you may have finished the race, others may still be trying to gain one more position with someone else. Please respect that.
 
Last edited:
Accordingly to you, the soft (default) setups really fit your driving style - fine! that's good! Me, however, find the cars that are too soft, more unstable and loose and easier to loss control, so for my driving style I found that harder sets are better for me.


Noo, no. I never said that the soft setups suit my driving style (whatever my style may be - I'm not even sure what my "style" is!). My argument is actually the opposite of what you've repeated there - I think most would agree that the soft setups are easiest to handle, not just agreeing through practice and experience, but through logic and reasoning. When you're describing with words like "loose" and "unstable", these are characteristic of harder settings - hard anti-roll/springs, more prone to wheelspin and oversteer (or sometimes understeer). For example, if somebody finds the car too "loose" exiting corners, the first thing I'd do is change to rear anti-roll to soft, or rear springs to soft.
 
Noo, no. I never said that the soft setups suit my driving style (whatever my style may be - I'm not even sure what my "style" is!). My argument is actually the opposite of what you've repeated there - I think most would agree that the soft setups are easiest to handle, not just agreeing through practice and experience, but through logic and reasoning. When you're describing with words like "loose" and "unstable", these are characteristic of harder settings - hard anti-roll/springs, more prone to wheelspin and oversteer (or sometimes understeer). For example, if somebody finds the car too "loose" exiting corners, the first thing I'd do is change to rear anti-roll to soft, or rear springs to soft.

OK, I guess then probably my choice of words isn't the best. By "loose" and "unstable" I'm referring to what you could describe as "spongy" or "bouncy". I rather prefer a harder car, snapier, sharper, that might loose grip quicker and suddenly, but I feel that it's easier to overcome it, by correcting it through wheel and throttle.

With a harder car I'm able to react instinctively and "on the spot", on the exact time frame. While with a softer one I feel like I have to "predict" the car's reactions and anticipate them.

That's why I´ve said earlier that with a more comfortable setup to me, I know where are the limits, I know where I am, and I know how far can I push it to improve. With default settings I'm more concerned on actually keeping the car in track (the antecipation and prediction of reactions) rather than looking to get to those limits.
 
First things first, i would like to apologise to jjaisli for my outspoken comments. I was in a particularly foul mood when i wrote those comments after been stuck in snow for hours on the way home. So hopefully you'll accept my apology. Comments on other forums i feel were justified.
Some of the best races i've had online is when people can select whatever assist or set-up they want. Had a great race with Kevhead11 at Vallelunga the other day. Started the lobby with no assists but was asked by Kev if he could have ABS. He says the brakes lock up too easily without it (due to the lack of feel and sound) and he has a point especially with the DBR9. I think assists should be allowed, especially for inexperienced drivers so at least they can race fairly competitively from start. This would not be detrimental to more experienced racers as i feel the cars are inherently faster without the aids.

Perhaps for future events you could employ a rolling start like FC. This i feel worked well particularly in larger lobbies and would work well with a reverse grid, with the faster drivers at the back.
Another consideration could be the fact that some cars suit some tracks better than others. Imagine 16 360 GT's around Vallelunga, a good recipe for a race. 16 CCX's at the same track, no assists, default settings and in the rain is another matter. I hope you understand my point. I
 
Last edited:
JJ, do you not think the grid for the 3rd race should be the finishing order for the 2nd race, rather than doing qualifying? This would save some time, and the qualified grid for the 3rd race may end up being similar to the finishing order of the 2nd race anyway.
 
No offense taken Sarrinen. And as I said, I made a few remarks myself, which I intended to be humorous and light hearted and I'm sorry if it didn't come out that way.

You're of course entitled to your opinion and I don't mean to suggest otherwise. I meant only that I wish you had decided to join in the event and try it out rather than declining to take part. Although, considering what happened and the mess it turned into, perhaps it was for the best. :lol: That said, the majority seemed to feel it had some merit so I've decided it's worth it to give it another go for the 365 GTS4 event.

Assists are something that I haven't been willing to compromise on, although I'm sure Frawe and Arvore would appreciate me turning them on. I may in fact do so for Series II (The Ferrari Challenge events with the 348/355/430/FXX Cars--coming after the end of the classic series) as the more modern cars are meant to be driven with certain assists. But I felt especially with cars from the 50s, 60s and 70s, that it didn't make sense to have stability control or ABS. My attitude here is not all together altruistic but I feel very strongly about it. And using assists like ABS or the racing line would only give some an unfair advantage and I can't see the point.

New Soul mentioned the rolling start as well and I was mulling this over. But ultimately, I'm not sure it will make a difference. It worked in Ferrari Challenge (or let's say, it helped) because the grid was appropriately staggered at the start. And I'm not sure if we could really get 14-16 people to properly form up to start the race. At any rate, the majority of contact issues seem to happen when the field is bunched together in a tight group and come the first corner, I'm not sure if it will really make things better because inevitably, the field will be reaching that corner at a higher speed. But I'm willing to try it out in the next event. Or I'll think it over for the start of Silverstone (being a wet race)
 
JJ, do you not think the grid for the 3rd race should be the finishing order for the 2nd race, rather than doing qualifying? This would save some time, and the qualified grid for the 3rd race may end up being similar to the finishing order of the 2nd race anyway.

Actually, I did consider this, but unless I'm mistaken, I don't think it will work. You can take the OVERALL finishing position or reverse finishing position for grid order but not JUST from the last race. And that would mean then that the grid for Montreal would be a combination of results from the previous two races. At any rate, with the first corner at Montreal being a tight left hander with little room, I thought it made more sense to have the fastest qualifiers start in front.
 
You can take the OVERALL finishing position or reverse finishing position for grid order but not JUST from the last race. And that would mean then that the grid for Montreal would be a combination of results from the previous two races

Are you sure about this ???? From all I knew, the grid is always formed taking into account the finishing positions from the last race and the last race alone (not the "lobby standings") :odd:
 
Yeah I thought there was a 'Race Results' or 'Finishing Results' or something which took the results from the previous race.

Rolling Starts:
In reall life rolling starts can help to reduce anticipated incidents. But to pull that off in this kind of game would be too difficult I think. Grid releases don't have any rules - we're just released when the computer decides to release us (sometimes at slightly different times unfortunately). But rolling starts have a rule - you can't overtake before crossing the line. There's no way for this to be enforced (it's irrelevant whether everyone trusts one another). And rolling starts only work best when everybody knows the braking points. Part of the ongoing problem is people don't know the circuits properly (which means more than just knowing left or right - it's getting a feel for when to brake depending on a particular approach speed etc.). Running the scenario through my head, I think the cars may actually end up being closer together crossing the line, at a greater speed!
 
Last edited:
My two cents about rolling starts. IF we could choose the race-start mode, I would have no doubt to pick rolling starts, like they existed in FC (and still exist in SCC offline/Challenge Mode/Invitational races). The game released you at a given speed, equal to everyone else, and with some gap between the cars in front/back. This meant that 1st corner pile-ups were a rarity, at least in online racing between the usual suspects.

Now, trying to recreate this in SCC online, will only mean that we will all arrive to corner 1 a lot faster then from a standing-start, and with no gaps whatsoever. A pack of cars at high speed all heading for the same braking point ... I urge you all to review my experience at Nurburgring / Corner 1 in the P4 event. Check the video, you'll get a good idea about what will happen :lol:

Fact is, even among the most experienced of SCC online racers I doubt that there was EVER a online race with more than 6 cars at Nurburgring, Montreal, Paul Ricard (just to name these three) where corner 1, first lap, didn't see at least some carnage and off-roading. And this, from a standing start.

So, I think a rolling start, not managed by the game but based on the "good judgement" of the players ... won't work as we all wish it did.
 
I was in a particularly foul mood when i wrote those comments after been stuck in snow for hours on the way home

Hey, now you know what it's like for us - 6 months of the year! ;)

The trouble is, even if players DO know the track & their braking points well, when you get a number of cars entering a corner bunched up during the first lap, the normal braking points don't count for anything.

People have to drive slowly & not try to gain position for the first lap or so. I made a very conscious effort to do this in the last two races & things went a little better (I still managed to rear-end Turner on the 2nd or 3rd lap at Riviera :O) , but there were some other drivers who took my cautious driving on the first lap as an opportunity to push through & pick up places. In the end the starting grid at Riveira didn't count for much because almost everyone rammed the wall & spun at some point or other! :ouch:

The other thing to watch is that if you're drafting someone into a corner you wind up going much faster then normal & have to adjust your braking point accordingly.
 
Yeah and in addition to that, I suspect that the draft also affects braking by reducing drag (not a certainty, but it really feels like that so much of the time). What I actually do now is avoid closing more than around 50m, unless I'm 100% going to send the car up the inside. In fact I'd say it's advisable never to really be closer than around 50m approaching a corner unless you're going to overtake, or unless you can very accurately predict the movement of the car in front, especially when amongst a group of cars.
 
Formation lap and rolling start
The field of cars travels around lap 1 carefully getting into their starting position,

then the pole position man is to control the field keeping at between 60 & 80Mph.

As you approach the Last Turn Pole man is to back the field up to BELOW 50Mph!

And maintain that speed meanwhile everyone is to form up in single file.

As soon as the Pole car speeds up, that is the signal that the race has started

You are then free to pass, overtake any car as long as you can safely do so because

the race was started as soon as the pole man pressed the accelerator.
 
That was the UKOG way in their FC Championships wasn't it? I remember Geordie and dyer explaining something very similar to me back in the FC days
 
VIR in the 365 GTS4, it's (almost) the promised 2 gear only race :lol::D:D.

About the rolling start no matter how atracttive the idea may seem, i think it will just not work...:scared: but i guess it's Jeff's call...
 
That was the UKOG way in their FC Championships wasn't it? I remember Geordie and dyer explaining something very similar to me back in the FC days

yes that was the way we did it, i think ts wery good, the diference is that head sets are not alowed in thies events.
we did talk to each other during the races, informing about position, colisions, atemts to overtake, clear after pasing, and befor the start the last guy in the grid checed if all cars wer lined up corectly , and gave the clear signal to the pole man to begin the start countdown..
unfortunat the hedsets dont work in 16p lobys in scc as good as they shuld,
we wold have to do the roling start without headset suport, but thats not a big problem, a little more disciple and the job is done.
 
Last edited:
LOL:lol::lol::lol::banghead:
 
Back