Should I include these in 67X V3?

Discussion and releases for the 1998 racing simulation by Sierra/Papyrus
Post Reply
User avatar
PTRACER
Forum Administrator
Forum Administrator
Posts: 42138
Joined: 20 years ago
Real Name: Paul
Favourite Motorsport: Formula 1
Favourite Racing Car: Lotus 49
Favourite Driver: Gilles Villeneuve, James Hunt
Favourite Circuit: Nordschleife
Car(s) Currently Owned: Mitsubishi Lancer Evo X JDM
Contact:

Should I include these in 67X V3?

#1

Post by PTRACER »

Since I don't have a team I'll share this with you guys. I've been wondering for a while now whether to include these and would appreciate a second opinion!

1. Non-championship race carsets. What's your opinion on the inclusion of these? I wasn't personally so interested in including them, but I could if they are wanted.

2. Altitude modelling. Circuits like Kyalami and Mexico had high altitudes and it reduced the horsepower produced by the engines. I can't do it automatically based on circuit choice, so I would have to hard code it into each mod physics. Every track you drive on with that particular mod would have lower BHP. Is that taking 'realism' too far?

3. Variable grip for different circuits. Circuits like Kyalami and Zandvoort were most likely lower grip than others because of dust/sand. Spa being a public road also likely had lower grip. Same as above though, it would need to be hardcoded.

Appreciate your input :)
Developer of the 1967v3 Historic Mod for Grand Prix Legends: viewtopic.php?t=17429

King of the Race Track, Destroyer of Tyres, Breaker of Lap Records
User avatar
GrandPrixYannick
Regular Member
Regular Member
Posts: 52
Joined: 2 years ago
Favourite Motorsport: Formula 1
Favourite Racing Car: BRM P261
Favourite Driver: Jackie Stewart, Max Verstappen
Favourite Circuit: Spa (the old one)
Car(s) Currently Owned: Renault Megane Coupe
Contact:

#2

Post by GrandPrixYannick »

I think adding the factor of elevation and grip levels per track would be a great addition. GPL has been the pinnacle of immersion for me and could always add extra scoops of it if it's possible. :)

For the Non-championship I'd also say yes. Excluding them would perhaps be a bit of a downgrade compared to V2.
Michkov
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
Posts: 1533
Joined: 18 years ago

#3

Post by Michkov »

3) seems a bit subjective and too variable corner by corner I feel. I got no opinion on the NC race sets, if it doesn't cost time sure. I'd finish the WC rounds first and maybe the NC sets as addons later if that is possible.

Altitude modelling is a definite yes. What are your plans for that? Just the HP adjustment or drag and cooling as well?
User avatar
PTRACER
Forum Administrator
Forum Administrator
Posts: 42138
Joined: 20 years ago
Real Name: Paul
Favourite Motorsport: Formula 1
Favourite Racing Car: Lotus 49
Favourite Driver: Gilles Villeneuve, James Hunt
Favourite Circuit: Nordschleife
Car(s) Currently Owned: Mitsubishi Lancer Evo X JDM
Contact:

#4

Post by PTRACER »

Michkov wrote: 2 years ago 3) seems a bit subjective and too variable corner by corner I feel. I got no opinion on the NC race sets, if it doesn't cost time sure. I'd finish the WC rounds first and maybe the NC sets as addons later if that is possible.

Altitude modelling is a definite yes. What are your plans for that? Just the HP adjustment or drag and cooling as well?
The whole track would be the same grip, but maybe one track would be slightly less than another. As you say it would be highly subjective, so it would mostly be based on the sorts of laptimes I can do. E.g. If I'm way too fast at a particular track I would reduce the grip slightly. But it might not be very scientific :mrgreen:

I was also thinking the same about the NC carsets...I could easily release it as a separate add-on later.

For altitude modelling, yep just a general HP adjustment :) Drag too if I can calculate accurately. I would probably not adjust the cooling.
Developer of the 1967v3 Historic Mod for Grand Prix Legends: viewtopic.php?t=17429

King of the Race Track, Destroyer of Tyres, Breaker of Lap Records
Michkov
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
Posts: 1533
Joined: 18 years ago

#5

Post by Michkov »

AFAIK all three are simply proportional to density, so scaling them up or down the same as the HP should be a good first approximation at least.
User avatar
PTRACER
Forum Administrator
Forum Administrator
Posts: 42138
Joined: 20 years ago
Real Name: Paul
Favourite Motorsport: Formula 1
Favourite Racing Car: Lotus 49
Favourite Driver: Gilles Villeneuve, James Hunt
Favourite Circuit: Nordschleife
Car(s) Currently Owned: Mitsubishi Lancer Evo X JDM
Contact:

#6

Post by PTRACER »

Michkov wrote: 2 years ago AFAIK all three are simply proportional to density, so scaling them up or down the same as the HP should be a good first approximation at least.
Just did a calculation, seems like that's not far off!

Using basic figures, the Lotus 49 would lose 22% of its horsepower but have 19% less drag at Mexico City (7350ft). Only a few percentage points difference :)

I'm buried deep into GPL's code at the moment trying to work out how drag is calculated. I was hoping there to be an actual air density figure I could change but I'm not finding it, so I'll just update each car according to the above.
Developer of the 1967v3 Historic Mod for Grand Prix Legends: viewtopic.php?t=17429

King of the Race Track, Destroyer of Tyres, Breaker of Lap Records
User avatar
Ian-S
Legendary Member
Legendary Member
Posts: 10232
Joined: 16 years ago

#7

Post by Ian-S »

Look at the rear wing drag, in the other game that appeals to be the controlling factor.
I am very sorry if you find my posts long and boring, I like to type and often go off on a tangent.
If this is the case, you may click here to solve the problem, or alternatively here too.
mcmirande
New Member
New Member
Posts: 35
Joined: 2 years ago
Real Name: Marcos Mirande
Favourite Motorsport: Formula 1
Favourite Racing Car: Renault RE30
Favourite Driver: Alain Prost
Favourite Circuit: Too many...
Car(s) Currently Owned: Renault Duster
Location: San Pablo, Tucumán, Argentina
Contact:

#8

Post by mcmirande »

PTRACER wrote: 2 years ago
Michkov wrote: 2 years ago AFAIK all three are simply proportional to density, so scaling them up or down the same as the HP should be a good first approximation at least.
Just did a calculation, seems like that's not far off!

Using basic figures, the Lotus 49 would lose 22% of its horsepower but have 19% less drag at Mexico City (7350ft). Only a few percentage points difference :)

I'm buried deep into GPL's code at the moment trying to work out how drag is calculated. I was hoping there to be an actual air density figure I could change but I'm not finding it, so I'll just update each car according to the above.
Hi all

Would be great to simulate the altitude considering also the drag. If not, the loss of HP would affect too much the speed of the cars because the less HP wouldn't be "compensated" by the less drag. But I'm rather thinking in the source data of altitude of each track. That's in the track.ini, but is it safe just to take that information from there? If so, thinking online... the track.ini of the server would be considered or those of the clients? Overall, I think would be great to add this feature to GPL. I really don't know if most "modern sims" take this info into account at all... But If I should vote, I prefer not to modify it unless we're really sure it wouldn't create a problem for online racing.

Cheers, Marcos.
User avatar
PTRACER
Forum Administrator
Forum Administrator
Posts: 42138
Joined: 20 years ago
Real Name: Paul
Favourite Motorsport: Formula 1
Favourite Racing Car: Lotus 49
Favourite Driver: Gilles Villeneuve, James Hunt
Favourite Circuit: Nordschleife
Car(s) Currently Owned: Mitsubishi Lancer Evo X JDM
Contact:

#9

Post by PTRACER »

mcmirande wrote: 2 years ago
PTRACER wrote: 2 years ago
Michkov wrote: 2 years ago AFAIK all three are simply proportional to density, so scaling them up or down the same as the HP should be a good first approximation at least.
Just did a calculation, seems like that's not far off!

Using basic figures, the Lotus 49 would lose 22% of its horsepower but have 19% less drag at Mexico City (7350ft). Only a few percentage points difference :)

I'm buried deep into GPL's code at the moment trying to work out how drag is calculated. I was hoping there to be an actual air density figure I could change but I'm not finding it, so I'll just update each car according to the above.
Hi all

Would be great to simulate the altitude considering also the drag. If not, the loss of HP would affect too much the speed of the cars because the less HP wouldn't be "compensated" by the less drag. But I'm rather thinking in the source data of altitude of each track. That's in the track.ini, but is it safe just to take that information from there? If so, thinking online... the track.ini of the server would be considered or those of the clients? Overall, I think would be great to add this feature to GPL. I really don't know if most "modern sims" take this info into account at all... But If I should vote, I prefer not to modify it unless we're really sure it wouldn't create a problem for online racing.

Cheers, Marcos.
Hi Marcos!

As I said above, I cannot do it from the track.ini unfortunately, so I will hardcode it into the mod physics.

You could drive the Mexico GP set at any circuit and it will have 20% less horsepower and 20% drag everywhere. I want to test it later to see what kind of effect this has, then it might allow people to make a decision.
Developer of the 1967v3 Historic Mod for Grand Prix Legends: viewtopic.php?t=17429

King of the Race Track, Destroyer of Tyres, Breaker of Lap Records
User avatar
PTRACER
Forum Administrator
Forum Administrator
Posts: 42138
Joined: 20 years ago
Real Name: Paul
Favourite Motorsport: Formula 1
Favourite Racing Car: Lotus 49
Favourite Driver: Gilles Villeneuve, James Hunt
Favourite Circuit: Nordschleife
Car(s) Currently Owned: Mitsubishi Lancer Evo X JDM
Contact:

#10

Post by PTRACER »

Okay, I have done a test at Mexico City in the BT24.

Top speed before T1 braking zone.

At 0m -- Speed: 174mph
At 2240m -- Speed: 164mph

So, with 19% less drag and 22% less BHP, we are losing 10mph top speed. Does that sound like it should be right? :huh:
Developer of the 1967v3 Historic Mod for Grand Prix Legends: viewtopic.php?t=17429

King of the Race Track, Destroyer of Tyres, Breaker of Lap Records
User avatar
Everso Biggyballies
Legendary Member
Legendary Member
Posts: 48993
Joined: 18 years ago
Real Name: Chris
Favourite Motorsport: Anything that goes left and right.
Favourite Racing Car: Too Many to mention
Favourite Driver: Kimi,Niki,Jim(none called Michael)
Favourite Circuit: Nordschleife, Spa, Mt Panorama.
Car(s) Currently Owned: Audi SQ5 3.0L V6 TwinTurbo
Location: Just moved 3 klms further away so now 11 klms from Albert Park, Melbourne.

#11

Post by Everso Biggyballies »

PTRACER wrote: 2 years ago Okay, I have done a test at Mexico City in the BT24.

Top speed before T1 braking zone.

At 0m -- Speed: 174mph
At 2240m -- Speed: 164mph

So, with 19% less drag and 22% less BHP, we are losing 10mph top speed. Does that sound like it should be right? :huh:
Interesting article linked below (obviously based on current ie last season type cars and modern technology) from AMG Merc specifically about running at Mexico. Obviously it is related to a turbo engine which is less compromised by altitude and less power loss, so less relevant but there are some interesting observations in it. For instance I wasnt aware they use Monaco levels of downforce at Mexico. The article also also covers brakes and cooling.
It specifically mentions top speed is still very high at Mexico..... they equate it to the top speed faster than Monza despite using Monaco size wings.


A short extract re the aero....
How does altitude affect the aerodynamics of the car?

Because of the thin air, the drag of a Formula One car in Mexico City is much lower. There are fewer air particles for the car to move out of the way, so the car cuts through the air quicker and with less disruption. This is why the cars are so fast on the straights in Mexico, with a maximum speed higher than Monza (350 km/h) whilst running wings as big as the ones we use in Monaco.

However, fewer air particles also have the impact of less downforce being generated, as there is less air pushing the car into the ground. In fact, the downforce loss is around 25% in Mexico because of the altitude. As a result, the highest downforce specification - Monaco level of wing - is used but this is generating the same level of downforce (or even slightly less) as the Monza wing because of the lack of air density.

Aero grip is therefore pretty low in Mexico, but you can run a big wing without the penalty of drag, so top speeds are very high
Anyway the full article is here....

https://www.mercedesamgf1.com/en/news/2 ... %20density.

* I started life with nothing, and still have most of it left


“Good drivers have dead flies on the side windows!” (Walter Röhrl)

* I married Miss Right. Just didn't know her first name was Always
Michkov
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
Posts: 1533
Joined: 18 years ago

#12

Post by Michkov »

PTRACER wrote: 2 years ago Okay, I have done a test at Mexico City in the BT24.

Top speed before T1 braking zone.

At 0m -- Speed: 174mph
At 2240m -- Speed: 164mph

So, with 19% less drag and 22% less BHP, we are losing 10mph top speed. Does that sound like it should be right? :huh:
I get 1.3% less speed if I run the numbers, your's are ~5% less, looks good. This is just from modifying two number in the code? How are you measuring the speed, from a standing start or flying lap? I think standing start would be the better choice since you remove the variable of how much speed you carry through it from the measurement. Better yet test at Bloodbath, which is just two long straights connected by wide banked turns, perfect for terminal velocity and coast down tests. You dont even need to do a full lap if you want to know just the top speed.
Post Reply