250F T2 feels half way done, maybe little bit over that. I am considering to release it to workshop privately, and I will share it with people who will ask. It is one car to be more popular than others, but this way it will be a little more special. Maybe thats temporarily, maybe permanently.
There are still plenty of things to test and adjust, but the grand view seems pretty much right, and I can't stop driving it wherever I take. It is not as challenging as most other cars, but it still has that spicy bit of challenge and sense of true car handling. Just right.
Model needs things here and there improved and redone. Most notably body mesh cleaning, body mesh UV redone, AO rebaked, and some work on liveries detailing. Not essential, but has to be done.
One major thing that is over question mark for me is mass distribution. In some occasions this bit of data is unavailable, and mostly height of center of gravity is unknown, and educated guess needs to be done. For this car I have seen in several sources that mass distribution is 52% at the rear, and supposedly with empty fuel tank ! For me this is hard to believe, that it could be so with an empty fuel tank. Half empty more likely. To me it is more likely that there is 51-52% percent of mass at front. And then with a lot of fuel mass, plus few kg rearwards due to eventual rake angle which happens when soft rear suspension compress with fuel load.
It is a bit unclear also how good the drum brakes were. These and Mercedes drum brakes must have been possibly best drum brakes ever. Still I doubt they could have matched Vanwall brakes heat management. On the other hand in 1957 Aintree Maseartis and Vanwalls were great match in qualification. On the other hand in qualification they could have done a cool down lap for drums perhaps, and then press them hard for fast pace lap.
Aintree is quite demanding on brakes cooling performance, great track by the way, the more I drive the better it seems, tiny bit more cambers (track seems couple seconds too slow) and shaders rework would make it very good track.
I wanted to drive Zolder and Croft. But had to to do testing in "correct" tracks. I use Thruxton for wet physics testing.
I made some detailing for drum brakes, in texture, not 3D. And tried to add blur effect to it, it works, but it also doesn't, hard to understand, at least there is no alpha channel in tecture to take care of.
Hey bale on track, just enough gap to keep racing line. This is why as a driver you need to look far ahead.
250F was know not only as forgiving (to a degree) and easy on dry, but even more so in wet in comparison to others. Giulio Alfieri explained in an interview with Doug Nye, car handled very good, especially in the wet because everything was good - good front and rear suspension and geometry, good tires. But bascially not too good tires and chassis. Lack of chassis stiffness added softness exposed by lateral forces, and tires didn't have too much lateral grip and that just worked out very well in combination. These words were likely more about early version of 250F, as T2 had stiffer chassis, but I think it still applied.
