Automobilista 2 V1.4.6.1 Officially Released - Now Updated to V1.4.6.4

Thanks Crimson.
What's the download?

 

I switched back to the main branch (if that's what's it's called) from the release candidate and the download started.

Having completed, I then switched back to the release candidate and now that's got a 2.3GB download! Just wondering what it's all about.

 

You're updating the files on your machine each time you switch branch. You're just reverting back to the old version and then back to new.

 

That makes sense, thanks. And to Crimson for the prompt responses!

 

Yeah, fingers crossed the BOP is fair, I would prefer no BOP, but nowadays it seems only F1 is able to thrive without it and the high costs and/or domination by a single team that can come with it.

 

I think with the fuel rules in Group C they were basically pushing for fuel efficiency, that's the incentive that was set. Was the C9 more fuel efficient than the Porsche? Idk, they probably were similar as both Sauber Mercedes and Porsche certainly knew what they were doing. One thing's for sure, it wasn't less efficient as it not only dominated in '89 but also kept winning until the C11 entered the arena in 1990.

Why was it so dominant? Probably a combination of factors, reliability, drivers, engineering, strategy, it was and still is a team effort. No one wins championships alone. In endurance racing not the fastest teams win but those who spend less time in the pits, so reliability is probably more important than fuel efficiency.

Imo before Reiza made these changes to balance the class you probably had no chance to win a race if you picked the Porsche on a speed track like Spa '70 or Monza '91, even on Spielberg Historic, but on twisty tracks you were better off picking the Corvette or the Porsche. So I think even with the online short race mentality which unfortunately exists (not only) in AMS2 you'd see more Porsches at Laguna Seca e.g. Imo a BoP wasn't necessarily needed.

 

And I don't see the problem of not being able to win in a slower car either, just like what happens with real drivers.

 

I agree with you, I'll take a fun, clean race over a win, but let's say you want to win races it'd be very unlikely with the Porsche at Monza e.g. due to the Nissan and the C9 being so much faster on speed tracks.

That's why I think it's shame that most races are 5 or 6 laps. In longer races you could win in a Porsche, you can recover from mistakes, other people can make mistakes etc.etc. In a 5 laps race most people think 'let's take the Nissan and quickly drive away' and you end up in a Nissan/C9 lobby with your Porsche. That's not much fun either.

 

The RealWeather has hourly resolution, so yes.

 

I'm not sure if that's true, F1 has very strict design rules, heavy restrictions to test and a cost cap and all this to keep the field close together

 

Oh but I agree, every sport needs its rules and restrictions, what I am not a fan of is handicaping the best to create a false "parity" for the others that didnt manage to do the job.
Just not a fan of it on what's supposed to be the pinnacle of sportscar racing, have no issue with it on smaller racing series.

 

One hughe point in engine efficiency is manufacturing quality. The material roughness factor (rz) was decreased a lot in the last 2 decades. That allows for higher compression through longer strokes that produce higher piston speeds. In the past it was necessary to use short stroke engines for high revolutions to keep piston speed low. Nowadays even long stroke engines can go beyond 7000rpm, resulting in way better torque to revolution ratio and a flatter torque to power curve.

 

I think this thread went off the rails... I suggest we try to keep it solely focused on actual feedback on the release candidate.

 

Welcome to every thread, everywhere - all at once.

 

Cheese anyone?

 

That has always been a dichotomy with designers swinging back and forward based on trends: shorter strokes cause very high stresses on the mechanical parts but reduce the friction losses, longer strokes are less efficient thermodynamically because the fluid in the combustion chamber exchanges energy with lower temperatures as it has more time to cool down along the expansion stroke.
Also generally bigger capacity engine with a given power (either limited by fuel or by turbo pressure or other means) have generally higher friction losses. Smaller engines will have higher stresses (think about Acura vs Cadillac in today LMDH) with reduced friction losses.

 

Didn't the XJR-14 kinda beated it? i know there was those bad regulation changes on 1991 but they kinda did beat the mercs in 91 thought