|
|
|
#1 |
|
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Near TT Assen
|
So I tried just some things in the 2006 season on Monza junior with stock setup..
Seat Toledo Cupra - 58.275 Seat Leon 2006 - 58.609 Alfa Romeo (Farfus) - 58.125 Alfa Romeo GTA (unknown driver) - 57.625 (!!!) BMW e90 - 58.652 BMW e46 - 58.540 As you can see the 'older' cars are all faster ![]() Especially the Alfa GTA is very interesting. I know the Toledo has very bad slow corner speed. But still very impressive how these older cars beat the newer ones.. Do others experience the same? Last edited by pitradio; 13 April 09 at 00:37. |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Moderator
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: North Carolina
|
Look in the Hotlaps lists.
There aren't any times listed at any track that show an older car being faster than a newer one. Of course, most drivers don't usually drive the older cars, but if they actually were faster, they would. |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 | |
|
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Near TT Assen
|
Quote:
Same thing happens in F1, remember the ultra fast Orange Arrows in 2001 or so at Monza, but it lacked downforce for 'normal' tracks. But it could also be that people never drive the older cars because they THINK it's slower and therefor never tested it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Moderator
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: North Carolina
|
A downforce issue? If it is, who is being helped? Your findings suggest the older are slower. The Hotlaps suggest the opposite.
It's pretty easy to answer that question. Look in the tire files and see what traction numbers for different years are for the same car, and look at the car's files to see what it's aero numbers are. It might surprise you. |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 | |
|
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Near TT Assen
|
Quote:
![]() And my findings suggest the newer are slower, not the older ones. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Moderator
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: North Carolina
|
Typo... actually, my fingers typed it backwards.........
Yes, your findings suggest the newer are slower. The Hotlaps don't and include laps for both. It's a safe assumption that the slower times from the older cars were done by drivers who did not believe they were driving slower cars. |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 | |
|
Moderator
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: North Carolina
|
Quote:
If you look through the WTCC_2006 folder at all the files, you'll find only two tyre files in the entire thing. One is for FWD cars. The other is for RWD cars. The same is true for the WTCC_2007 folder. If you compare the differences between the 2006 and the 2007 FWD tyr files, you'll see two files that look almost identical. Look closely and you'll see what appears to be copy/paste files where one was created from the other. Even the documentation notation on the lines is identical. However, there are 3 lines where there is a very slight difference in the longitudinal numbers for the front tyres. The 2007 front tyres have a 1.5% greater longitudinal grip than the 2006 fronts. There is an equally small difference in slip range where the former has an effect. If there was an advantage, it'd be to the 2007 benefit. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Join Date: Nov 2006
|
One thing you must remember is that Race06 and Race07 intially came with realistic car related performance, relative to the season they ran in, however the whole content has now been patched with performance balanced cars so you can race anything in theory and win, rightly or wrongly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 | |
|
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Near TT Assen
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Join Date: Nov 2006
|
I agree, both scenarios have their virtues.
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|