[REL] 1967 Endurance (Proto/Sports/GT) - modded Howston G4

More OT...

Or maybe not. Mercedes tested an air brake to a 300 SL Coupė at Le Mans in 1952 and in 1955 raced with one https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/archive/article/march-1966/24/air-spoilers

 

There has been mention in Discord that (at least with Porsche 910 representing Proch 100) fuel consumption was unrealisticaly low. Also that tire wear was very low. Not many details were provided, except that fuel consumption rate was set to 3x and car did a hour at Le Grand Circuit with full tank and tire wear was less than 3%.

I haven't thoroughly tested fuel consumption and tire wear with all cars through all range. So it is possible that something got skewed and should be improved.

For fuel consumption I used 1.3 Alpines (represented by Ardouin) at Brianza (representing Monza) 10 km layout. The layout being 10km and the track being consistently in high RPM through the lap and with fair amount with highspeed (thus drag) I think it is good to gauge fuel consumption without draining all tank. Basically it is enough to do 2-3laps to check fuel consumption per lap estimation on the HUD, always with normal fuel consumption setting of course. I used information about Alpines as reference point, which was that they should have done 9-10 pitstops per whole race and that it had a goal to win on thermal efficiency rating. In the race best 1.3 Alpine Renault A210 did 321laps, which was 4324km distance and put them in 9th place behind 4 Porsches (out of 16 finishing cars). Not going to do maths for you now, but just coming back to the report that Porsche was able to make a hour with full tank at 3x consumption, is probably too much, but it is not insanely far off theoretical 2.4 hours for Alpines. This being said, I definitely will have to investigate, as Proch engine actually is set to have 1.72x more consumption than 1.3 Ardouin, also it does rev 500rpm more and its top speed is higher, so it probably should do about 1.5hour with normal consumption with full tank at LGC, which would mean that now it probably does it 2x too much, if the report by Discord user was exact.

Report user didn't include information which tire did he use. There is normal tire with relatively good grip and more rapid wear, endurance tire has less wear, but also less grip. I haven't tested it thoroughly within big distances, but ~3percent by an hour seems right to me. This would mean that tire would last about three hours. Tire wouldn't be safe to race under 90percent, or would it ? Though actually it might be normal tire, not endurance. I can't actually confirm how much the endurance tire should last, but tire change shouldn't be often for a player (unfortunately AI seems to always do tire change during the pitstop, and I don't think I have control over that). If anyone know how frequent the tire changes in Le mans was, then it would be nice to find out, also if they all used hard tires, perhaps somebody used softer faster wearing tires instead, IDK.

So yes those are things that needs more polishing, more time spent to get nicely. Of course with little more ingenuity it is possible to shorten processes and get same results, but with ~30 cars it is challenging anyway. My main focus was handling qualities of the cars, excitement, good feel and good experience of driving, but other things such as fuel consumption and tire wear are most definitely very important as well.

 

Oh, one more interesting detail. Absolutely obvious, but at least to me it was surprising, because I just didn't think about it before. During testing AI I noticed that slower cars would usually pit later, but I forgot that not the actual time is the most important, but the distance traveled. As an example Ford GT40 MK4 would pit earlier, but already with much more distance covered. In fact (well fact check would be welcome though) GT40 MK4 won thermal efficiency rating with their huge engine and insane top speed in 1967 Le Mans.

edit: indeed
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1967_24_Hours_of_Le_Mans#Index_of_Thermal_Efficiency

 

I think i read (from a Gurney interview?) that a good part of the reason the MkIV won thermal efficiency was because they were coasting so much. It might have been different if they were pushed every meter of the race. That might have been if two of the other MkIV were pushing each other, because Gurney had it well set in his mind that going slow was the way to go

 

That undeniably was a factor, at the end they covered the biggest distance most efficiently and thats it WIN WIN situation and then sprayed the champagne

 

Will there be sometime rain drops update for this cars?

 

there probably should be some time. The standard Howstons already have it, so it shouldn't be too difficult, but it hasn't been a personal priority

 

if you need help to make accurate tests, fuel, tires, etc. I'm available and I like to make tests, if it can help, tell me the configuration you want: car/circuit/setup etc..I'll be happy to help!

 

If you want to help then it is welcome. Especially if you can hit some accuracy, which also means that you'll get more data/references/etc..

And standard Howstons windshields has been updated by S397 ? Nice.

 

Do you want fuel consumption and tire wear tests? On which car?

 

If the windshields have been updated, that is awesome, as that is something I don't know how to do.

But for the main carbody, it isn't too difficult to apply the latest material shaders to it. I'll have an outline of the procedure typed out that I'll post shortly:

https://forum.studio-397.com/index.php?threads/ibl-pbr-car-shader-assistance.64024/page-2

It is now posted

 

It doesn't matter, anything is good as long as it is positive contribution.

 

short test of the Proto 1.1
all the test with original setup and 20L fuel, clutch and automatic gear.
Kyalami GP 1976>10Laps>real road: naturaly progress>all: Normal (tyre/fuel)>Weather scripted Clear, 29°>30% humidity

N° 52,CD-SP-66 Peugeot>0.90L per Laps>1% tire wear : 1.39.5xx
N°54 CostinNathan/Hillman>.085L per Laps>1% tire wear : 1.41.2xx
N°55 Alpine M64>0.87L per Laps>1% tire wear : 1.39.9xx
N°56 Alpine A210>0.88L per Laps>1% tire wear (little more in rear, more slide^^) 1.39.5xx

a lot of fun with the little proto, they are well balanced, I drove as smooth as possible without overdriving some little slips and slight off-road excursion but very good car for me. not easy to see impossible to keep the tires at temperature like all the cars of rf2 (the temperature drops very quickly, normal? I don't know! )
very consistent, very balanced!

Next time Proto 1.1/1.3

 

While I agree that the Mercedes air brake got used in ways that the designers never intended, it's not even remotely shaped like a wing.

 

Strangely the earlier 300 SL Coupė air brake did look like a wing but wasn't used as one.

 

short test of the Proto 1.1/1.3
all the test with original setup and 20L fuel, clutch and automatic gear.
Kyalami GP 1976>10Laps>real road: naturaly progress>all: Normal (tyre/fuel)>Weather scripted Clear, 29°>30% humidity

N°46: Alpine A210> 0.91L per laps> 1%++ tire wear(6e laps)> 1.36.8xx
N°50: Marcos mini GT C2> 1.45L per laps> 1%++ tire wear> 1.41.9xx (very different to drive!!)
N°51 Austin Healey spirit LM> 1.41L per laps> 1% tire wear front, 2% rear> 1.42.2xx (very overwrought, quite wild and not easy to handle!)

I think for the Austin it takes a lot of practice and setup, with the basic setup it understeersteers too much, very hard to hold!
the Marcos is really different from the others, like a front-wheel drive in the steering wheel.
my preference is the Alpine, it responds very well, no surprise! (it consumes nothing compared to the other two!)

 

that's good news, because it is FWD I will make that note on the car's icon

 

Yes, Mini Marcos is very different because it is front wheel drive, actually everything about it is very different, except that all cars has same wheels. But it can perform, it can take very abrupt driving, and in fact it should be thrown around everywhere. Where most cars needs brakes, Mini will usually be alright with just throttle lift off. It will also have lift-off oversteer, but it is good because it helps to rotate the car more. Just have to keep in mind that unlike with RWD, with FWD you steer into a slide and floor the gas as hard as possible all the time.

Austin Healey should be pretty exciting, I think I missed out a bit of testing on it on later stages, but drove it a lot before.

Alpine is for sure, confidently best car of those. Another level.

 

This is actually amazing to see, never knew about this one.

By the way, speaking of wing, Opel RAK of late twenties had inverted wings. It was a rocket powered car, so I guess they expected that those wings will be practical.

 

I didn't know that, so it's very good and I have a good analysis