POS

I've been working on the e90, and gotten some excellent feedback -- thanks team!

Today I've gone over the car and changed a few significant specs, it's pretty much in line with the class. On paper, it's got the physics I want, but I'm unable to drive it till late tonight. If anyone wants a go at it, feel free to post your feedback. Never mind the model or skins or sound. My plan is to release a reskinned version with revamped physics, while I rework the model for the next release.

I'm particularly interested in fast laps times at Black Forest, Mt Pano, Silverstone, and Spa, how consistently it can be driven, and general behaviour.

As I did with the 997 topic, I'm setting up a PERMALINK to the current dev file.
It still requires the existing car.

wow! Finally the update i was searching for... Later today, I will test this new bmw, within an another car! Lot of test.

DANDY wrote:I'm particularly interested in fast laps times at Black Forest

The average is around 2:29'97 / 2:30'50.

The best in ten laps was 2:29'53, but its quite easy to get around 2:28'20

DonaemouS wrote:

DANDY wrote:I'm particularly interested in fast laps times at Black Forest

The average is around 2:29'97 / 2:30'50.

The best in ten laps was 2:29'53, but its quite easy to get around 2:28'20

TOO FAST!
Driving impressions?



EDIT: Screw it...UPDATED to 081124b with increased loadsensitivity (to -0.0075/-0.005 F/R, up from -0.115/-.0085) and reduced swaybar strength.

I was really waiting for this upgrade - thank you so much DANDY you did it!

And congrats...
But one step after the other...

I tried it out on HSL to get the feeling for it. And i was close to writing that with a wheel this should be great, but with a keyboard still tricky and too hard. I did not write it and took another 10 laps. Once i got it it was pure fun.
It turns much more than the Seat i am using normally and the back is coming with the turn - don't know the term for that *steering.
*under over upper lower heavy full nice turning -> pick appropriate
But its really fun to drive and you can even gain control again once it is close to being lost...

I did quite some TCC tests on the ASW equilibrium topic and would like to share all my data now after the driving impressions (sorry, a foolish long post again, i know).

Just remember: i am used to fwd tcc-cars, so its just one voice out in space that fills the puzzle...
My times are not posted to impress or show my thumbness, but imho needed for a proper comparison.
And TTT was in between - my driving skills might have become better or worse - i think i am just constant but this cant be said for sure in any way...

On LimeRock i had (numbers for seat "beta 2" that was released as 1.2, all numbers from the equilibrium-topic except the WTCC (obviously))
Seat Leon 55.92
Vauxhall 55.82
Volvo XTCC 55'32
and newly tested: BMW WTCC RC081124a 55'88 (wow)

Imola
Seat Leon 2:00'73 (TopSpeed: 205 km/h)
Vauxhall 2:00'26 (TopSpeed: 205 km/h)
Volvo XTCC 1:59'96 (TopSpeed: 207 km/h)
and newly tested: BMW WTCC RC081124a 2:00'86 (TopSpeed: 205 km/h)

Thruxton
Seat Leon 1:20'49 (TopSpeed: 219 km/h)
Vauxhall 1:21'30 (TopSpeed: 217 km/h)
Volvo XTCC 1:20'82 (TopSpeed: 226 km/h)
and newly tested: BMW WTCC RC081124a 1:20'25 (TopSpeed: 225 km/h)

For me a great improvement - and i really start to like it right now .
More voices are needed of cours to get a picture - probably even mp-races...

(The Mazda still needs some work imho though...)

thanks, and see you,
alphonse

No idea how you do it Dandy, but the steering has the same silky feel like in the 997 GT3. And I like that.

In terms of outright speed I cannot really comment because my driving style doesn't fit the BMW's handling. I can't get a good lap together, because it oversteers a bit too readily. But that might just be me.

What I do miss however is a better control of the line though a corner using the throttle. When I go off-throttle through a corner, the car is very neutral it first. Then, when the rear wheels load up some lateral forces, they try to brake away. Not much I can do apart from counter lock, a slight throttle input mostly makes spin even more.
Personally, I use engineRPMFriction and engineBaseFriction to get the turn in control I want.

I found that on tracks with short and sharp corners like Monaco the steering is very good. It is difficult to get the car understeer at any speed. I just turn in more and I take the corner. If it gets too much and the rear swings around, a short counter lock fixes it most of the time and anyway the corner is already gone. Most of the time I have to take back some corner lock.

On tracks with longer or large radii corners it's a different picture though. Well, actually it's the same behaviour, but this time I have real trouble controlling it: the back tries to overtake me more often than not, the very grippy front allows for no mistakes.

Obviously you don't need to setup the car how I like it, but I would add just a tad of understeer to the car. It allows for accomodating some driver error and might be more predictable in tricky situations.

so many modifications coming out my head is spinning.

Tried the car... liked the car. I dont know what you are doing differently, but I could never drive your cars and now I can. ? First time I tried RC081124a I was only two seconds slower than my volvo time, compared to I used to crash in every turn.

note: engine sound not loud enough? Never noticed before but switching from volvo to this makes me suspicious.

Nice D.

I got some seat time, and Version 081124c might be the answer.

I've reduced the rev limit to 8500 to conform with the rules, rather than have the tach point to 8500, and dropped the 'lectrodoodads. It's fast and neutral, yet requires precision input and skill to wring the most from it.

Comments appreciated.

DANDY wrote:I got some seat time, and Version 081124c might be the answer.

Is there a difference between 081124b and 082411c? I can't see any apart from the additional paintjob.
I went through both car files after driving both versions. The only thing I could find was that your final drive ratio reads 4:10 instead of 4.1. No idea how Redline interprets that.

DANDY wrote:Driving impressions?

Well, was not hard to make it, but the build i tried is the best BMW experience so far. The car is steady on fast turns, like the 3 ones after the start line. Is so well balanced, that I needed 4 laps to get confidence and push her to the limit, especially used to the old undriveable release. Is in the slow part up to the hill, where the new BMW show her character. Brake, release, insert the bonnet into the turn, accelerate and quickly full throttle. The BMW become insane, and I got every lap half to one second at lap in that section.

The weight move around the corners really smoothly. This mean, you don't fighting with a nervous car. Is also quite easy to get on an error while turning. But, once you decide to push full throttle, the BMW is completely understeering, especially at higher speed (on last chicane before finish line straight, i got grass a couple of time).

In last, suspensions. Well you can't do errors while braking; its like front suspension or CoG or load sens is too much for front suspension. The back become heavy and the car get an oversteering behavior. Don't touch the kerbs, or you are out.

Hoping to be useful

Tomte wrote: Is there a difference between 081124b and 082411c?

They're small but important. 8500 maxrpm (was 8800 to get a 'visual' 8500, and all loadsensitivity settings have a special character added.

DANDY wrote:

Tomte wrote: Is there a difference between 081124b and 082411c?

They're small but important. 8500 maxrpm (was 8800 to get a 'visual' 8500, and all loadsensitivity settings have a special character added.

Ah, I missed the ; for the loansensitivity, but the rpm figures show both 8500 in b and c. Or were there 2 version b?

Tomte wrote: the rpm figures show both 8500 in b and c. Or were there 2 version b?

Ah, right you are. It was late....(and by late I mean early)

just tried C. First lap got a better time than my all time best volvo time ! So I guess no one will find this car too slow now. Ironically enough, every other lap I did I messed up. Losing control of the car. All driver errors and all fun in making the game more interesting and exciting.

I like it.

DANDY wrote:I got some seat time, and Version 081124c might be the answer.

Comments appreciated.

Well, same as my previous post. I didnt notice any big changes. In 3 laps i was able to achieve 2:29'58.

DonaemouS wrote:Well, same as my previous post. I didnt notice any big changes. In 3 laps i was able to achieve 2:29'58.

That took a master's skill, no doubt. I certainly wasn't that fast, and I'm confident the average driver would be well off your pace. The BMW has always favoured Black Forest as well, so quicker than the Seat here doesn't bother me. If it beats it, the Mercedes and the Mazda everywhere, then I'll know I have a problem.
The change is small, but noticeable on a wheel. It's more lively, less stuck to the road, which a good driver can take advantage of, but will get a novice into trouble. I'll seed it to Team BMW for MP trials, if they're willing.

I was visiting the BMW World in Munich last month, dunno if I already posted these:

look at the second picture. They didn't remove the entire dashboard... You can still look at ventilation and fake aluminum parts.

Go for it DANDY

I went back to the track and compared the BMW to the Mercedes.
On Black Forest I can get the BMW to about 2:38 after two or three laps. With the Mercedes, I needed something like 10 laps to go down to 2:39. I could probably shave off another 1 or 2 seconds on both, the 190 and the BMW.
The BMW feels more lively through the corners, especially after you come out of the mountains (after three fifth of a lap). It's also more predictable in the way it reacts to load shifts. I wouldn't say that I'm more confident in the BMW, but I have to fight a bit less than in the Mercedes, which makes it quicker here.

On Mount Panorama, I also get similar times with both cars, again, with the BMW being able to take corners faster (first and last one for example). The funny thing is, with the BMW I think I reached the limit of grip, turn in a bit more and there is still more. With the Mercedes, when I reach the limit, that's it. Ok, make that MY limit.

At this point, I dont see the BMW having an advantage over the Mercedes, but I only compared them on these two tracks, which might not tell you much.

well, looking at BF, is renowned it is my favorite track. Now, looking at my time, is abou 4 seconds (four seconds) faster then my Volvo S60 lap. This mean, she IS killing and will have advantage on every track. I will try to keep a fast pace on Silverstone, and comparing to what is possible with Mazda or Mercedes. I suppose BMW will be too much quicker here too.

Since my first request, I would the BMW to be the quicker, but not 4 seconds on BF...

DonaemouS wrote:You can still look at ventilation and fake aluminum parts.

My last one had this included....not well done, but it was there.

I've done a line-by line comparison to the Volvo, referenced a few others as a control, and found one major error and a few minor things to change.

CoG is the big one, I didn't take into account the change in model position, so I've raised it 10.5 cm. Suspension travel is more or less equal (BM has more at the rear), so it's not a factor below..

Compare:

CoG:
BMW { 0.0, 0.42, 0.1}* changed y to 0.525
Volvo { 0.0,0.435,0.2689}

Wheel y position
BMW 0.35/0.365
Volvo 0.2167/0.2167

DIFFERENCE (front):
BMW 0.07 *NOW: 0.175 (I believe this should be lower than Volvo, and is coincidentally the same as the SEAT)
Volvo .2183

Inertia is up (actually, back to original spec), engine inertia is up, shift time is up. If it has become too slow, I'm willing to work with these. If it's still too fast....I win.

On to Version 081126a.
If anyone has the time, wishes to try it and offer more feedback, I remain grateful.
Physically away from my comp again today, so not driven yet. It may require further behavioural adjustments to compensate for the changes.
This one DOES NOT depend on the original plug, and WILL NOT conflict with it either.(I hope)

run this separate from the liveplug™????

amped™ wrote:run this separate from the liveplug™????

the liveplug can be trashed. I'll do a new one depending on how this one works out. I'm expecting a fix or two will be required, so probably seeding around 10-11PM tonight.

DANDY wrote:CoG:
BMW { 0.0, 0.42, 0.1}* changed y to 0.525
Volvo { 0.0,0.435,0.2689}

Wheel y position
BMW 0.35/0.365
Volvo 0.2167/0.2167

DIFFERENCE (front):
BMW 0.07 *NOW: 0.175 (I believe this should be lower than Volvo, and is coincidentally the same as the SEAT)
Volvo .2183

Well, apart frontAirResistance, I don't know other values. Yes, Volvo is "especially" wide and fat on front. slowDan apply an higher value, and I think he did quite well. Volvo is another world on frontAirResistance.

DonaemouS wrote: I don't know other values.

The DIFFERENCE value is the difference between the wheels' Y position and CoG, measured at the front wheels (BMW has more travel at rear, so a higher y position. At the front, they both have the same travel, so the comparison is simple).

full comparison of performance-impacting specs:

air resistance:
BMW 0.9
Volvo 0.85

downforce:
BMW -0.194
Volvo -0.1942

inertia:
BMW inertia {2030,2185,525}*changed for 081126a to 2230, 2385, 530
Volvo inertia {2254.8,2409.2,676.7}

CoG:
BMW { 0.0, 0.42, 0.1}* changed y to 0.525
Volvo { 0.0,0.435,0.2689}

Wheel y position
BMW 0.35/0.365
Volvo 0.2167/0.2167

DIFFERENCE:
BMW 0.06
Volvo .2183

engine:
BMW 207.435 KW / 245 Nm Max 8500RPM, inertia .18 *changed to 0.1925
Volvo 215.524 / 235 MAx 8900RPM, inertia .230

suspension (in order of appearance):
BMW 925/32000/23000/20500
Volvo 1000/35500/22000/17000

clutch: 367.5/350

diff:
BMW 4.10/125
Volvo 3.76/125

gearswitch:
BMW 0.25 *changed to 0.35
Volvo 0.28

wheels:
BMW
inertia 2.25
loadsens. 0/0
Volvo
inertia 2.4
loadsens. 0/-0.05