With renewed interest in Trans Am following the release of the latest
version of Project Wildfire's Trans Am mod, the TPTCC Regulars
considered switching formats to be a PWF league for their next season.
This would have made the name of the league an oxymoron. However in
4:1 voting the TPTCC 2.x format was retained for the upcoming season.
Season 2 race 1 hits the track on Sunday March 14th at 9AM eastern in
Trois Rivieres Quebec.
Full season schedule & rules here:
http://www.geocities.com/bbyarker1/tccreg.html
Join here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tptcc-regulars/
On a related note...
For those diehard Tptcc'ers...there is a series running Tuesday Nights
(NAmerican Time) that desperately needs drivers to keep it afloat.The
series will remain with the Tptcc mod if we get enough guys that would
prefer to run TPTCC as opposed to the PWF mod.
Link is here http://transam.issrl.com/
Thanks for your time
Adrian
mcewena wrote:
Quoted text (12 lines)
> With renewed interest in Trans Am following the release of the latest > version of Project Wildfire's Trans Am mod, the TPTCC Regulars > considered switching formats to be a PWF league for their next season. > This would have made the name of the league an oxymoron. However in > 4:1 voting the TPTCC 2.x format was retained for the upcoming season. > > Season 2 race 1 hits the track on Sunday March 14th at 9AM eastern in > Trois Rivieres Quebec. > > Full season schedule & rules here: > http://www.geocities.com/bbyarker1/tccreg.html > Join here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tptcc-regulars/Just curious...
What's wrong with the newly released PWF mod ?
On paper, it appears to be better.
-Larry
"mcewena" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted text (12 lines)
> With renewed interest in Trans Am following the release of the latest > version of Project Wildfire's Trans Am mod, the TPTCC Regulars > considered switching formats to be a PWF league for their next season. > This would have made the name of the league an oxymoron. However in > 4:1 voting the TPTCC 2.x format was retained for the upcoming season. > > Season 2 race 1 hits the track on Sunday March 14th at 9AM eastern in > Trois Rivieres Quebec. > > Full season schedule & rules here: > http://www.geocities.com/bbyarker1/tccreg.html > Join here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tptcc-regulars/>Just curious...
>
>What's wrong with the newly released PWF mod ?
>
>On paper, it appears to be better.
>
The impression I've gotten from people who have run both is that visible damage
is the only thing that's better. The driver viewpoint has more limited vision
as well. And, using PWF would entail that people repaint their cars. The
disadvantages outweigh the benefits for the people who have already run
TPTCC...
Eldred
--
http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
Screamers League
IICC League
GPLRank -6.0 MoGPL rank +267.80
Ch.Rank +52.58 MoC +741.71
Hist. +82.34 MoH:na
N2k3 rank:in progress
Slayer Spektera lvl 72 assassin
Slayer Spectral_K lvl 38 Necro
US East
> What's wrong with the newly released PWF mod ?
>Besides the fact we'd have to rename the league? ;) Nothing as far as I
could tell, it's just that voting went the other way. Maybe people didn't
want to download and re-paint? Plus there's no GT40 ;)
The initial driving position in PWF was a bit low in the car, making it hard
to see some of the apexes, but they quickly fixed that. For me the cars
actually felt better then TPTCC as I thought there was more of a gradual
progression from grip to no-grip, but I've been told I was imagining that.
I also swapped wheel/pedals so maybe thats where the difference was.
mcewena
>
EldredP wrote in news:[email hidden]:
Although I haven't downloaded it yet, there is a patch for the
cockpit view -- I gather it sets the driver's eyes somewhat higher so
they can see a little better out the front. Available for those who
_do_ have time to try it, at the PWF site.
--
Darryl
Quoted text (14 lines)
>>Just curious... >> >>What's wrong with the newly released PWF mod ? >> >>On paper, it appears to be better. >> > > The impression I've gotten from people who have run both is that > visible damage is the only thing that's better. The driver > viewpoint has more limited vision as well. And, using PWF would > entail that people repaint their cars. The disadvantages outweigh > the benefits for the people who have already run TPTCC... > > EldredVisual damage is not exactly a small thing, I think it's very important.
Plus I think they fixed the collision hulls so that the cars are actually
the size they appear to be, something which is still a big problem in TPTCC.
"EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
>
> The impression I've gotten from people who have run both is that visibledamage
> is the only thing that's better. The driver viewpoint has more limitedvision
Quoted text (16 lines)
> as well. And, using PWF would entail that people repaint their cars. The > disadvantages outweigh the benefits for the people who have already run > TPTCC... > > Eldred > -- > http://www.umich.edu/~epickett > Screamers League > IICC League > GPLRank -6.0 MoGPL rank +267.80 > Ch.Rank +52.58 MoC +741.71 > Hist. +82.34 MoH:na > N2k3 rank:in progress > Slayer Spektera lvl 72 assassin > Slayer Spectral_K lvl 38 Necro > US EastIn article <[email hidden]>, "Haqsau" <[email hidden]>
writes:
>Visual damage is not exactly a small thing, I think it's very important.
>Plus I think they fixed the collision hulls so that the cars are actually
>the size they appear to be, something which is still a big problem in TPTCC.
Ok - it was unimportant in the league I was in that was discussing it. :-) The
thinking being, who cares if you see damage? You're not supposed to hit
anything in the FIRST place...<g>
Eldred
--
http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
Screamers League
IICC League
GPLRank -6.0 MoGPL rank +267.80
Ch.Rank +52.58 MoC +741.71
Hist. +82.34 MoH:na
N2k3 rank:in progress
Slayer Spektera lvl 72 assassin
Slayer Spectral_K lvl 38 Necro
US East
"Haqsau" <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:
> Visual damage is not exactly a small thing, I think it's very
> important. Plus I think they fixed the collision hulls so that the
> cars are actually the size they appear to be, something which is still
> a big problem in TPTCC.
>
> yes it is a big problem, just like the shrunken cars in the PWF mod are
a problem. The Viper and Vettes are rather longish, yet in PWF they are
same as the Mustang. And while the Jag looks correct, I suspect it's
squished into the shorter box to fit damage.
The best solution for TPTCC would be to delete the shortish Mustang and
replace it with another car that is approximentally the same size as the
other cars. Take a screenshot ofthe TPTCC Competition Coupe Viper and then
take a still shot of the PWF CC Viper. Tell me which one looks 'right.'
Damage is something that the TPTCC team is working on. This points out
the shortcommings of Nr2k3 as a mod base when compared to F1c which is
INFINITELy more flexible in regard to chassis shape and size and damage and
differing physics. But the inherrant advantage of Nr2k3 online balances
out it's shortcommings.
Offline I tend these days to run the ETCC mod for F1c while I race the
TPTCC mod in the TPTCC B class league all while prepping a PWF Viper for
the upcomming 6 hour race at Daytona with my two Team SMO teammates.
Dave Henrie
Interesting...
I kinda felt that overall the PWF was a more polished Mod. But that's just
ke :)
-Larry
"EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
damage
> is the only thing that's better. The driver viewpoint has more limitedvision
Quoted text (8 lines)
> >Just curious... > > > >What's wrong with the newly released PWF mod ? > > > >On paper, it appears to be better. > > > > The impression I've gotten from people who have run both is that visibleQuoted text (16 lines)
> as well. And, using PWF would entail that people repaint their cars. The > disadvantages outweigh the benefits for the people who have already run > TPTCC... > > Eldred > -- > http://www.umich.edu/~epickett > Screamers League > IICC League > GPLRank -6.0 MoGPL rank +267.80 > Ch.Rank +52.58 MoC +741.71 > Hist. +82.34 MoH:na > N2k3 rank:in progress > Slayer Spektera lvl 72 assassin > Slayer Spectral_K lvl 38 Necro > US EastI really don't think the TPTCC situation is acceptable, nor do I think that
the PWF models needed to be changed much from their correct dimensions.
Overall lengths of the production cars that these models are based on:
Viper Competition Coupe: 184.1 in.
Corvette: 179.7 in.
Mustang: 183.2 in.
Ford GT: 182.8
Jaguar XK: 187.4
The Viper, Mustang, and GT are less than 2 inches different in length. To
fit the same box the Vette would have to be stretched, not the Mustang, but
you are correct that the Jag would have to be shrunk. Thing is, the claim
has been that the Mustang is short and that cannot be the case if they are
modelled correctly. If anything the Vette should have the worst problem as
it is the shortest and will be hitting everybody without ever appearing to
make contact.
The max difference we have is only 8 inches, which would be 4 inches front
and rear if the car is centered in its box. Taking the concept a little
further, why not set the collision box to the median size, ~184 in., and
allow the longer cars to stick outside the box slightly, making sure that
every car is centered in its box? Then you would literally be able to get
within 2 inches visually before a collision happens, and in some cases
(longest vs. shortest, avg. vs. avg) the appearance would be approximately
correct. I have never seen anyone online succeed in getting within 2 inches
of another car without bumping, even when the collision boxes are correct.
Even 6 or 8 inches would be pushing it online, particularly in road racing.
"Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> yes it is a big problem, just like the shrunken cars in the PWF modare
> a problem. The Viper and Vettes are rather longish, yet in PWF they are
> same as the Mustang. And while the Jag looks correct, I suspect it's
> squished into the shorter box to fit damage.
An update to the below specs - the March issue of Racer magazine has an
article on the Tran-Am Jag XKR. They list the overall length as 188.0 in.
Not a significant difference from a modelling perspective.
"Haqsau" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted text (9 lines)
> > Overall lengths of the production cars that these models are based on: > > Viper Competition Coupe: 184.1 in. > Corvette: 179.7 in. > Mustang: 183.2 in. > Ford GT: 182.8 > Jaguar XK: 187.4 >
Haqsau wrote:
There is also width and height to consider
Beers and cheers
(uncle) Goy
"goyl at nettx dot no"
http://www.theuspits.com
"A man is only as old as the woman he feels........"
--Groucho Marx--
Quoted text (8 lines)
> > Overall lengths of the production cars that these models are based on: > > Viper Competition Coupe: 184.1 in. > Corvette: 179.7 in. > Mustang: 183.2 in. > Ford GT: 182.8 > Jaguar XK: 187.4Not sure why height would be important. Sure if you want the collisions to
look accurate when you are upside down I guess that might be important but
my concern has to do with being able to run in traffic without bumping each
other.
Concerning width, in most sedan racing series the cars are all going to be
the same width, regardless of the width of the different production bodies.
The regulations stipulate the tire size and the maximum track, everybody
wants to run the maximum tire and track, and nobody wants the body to be any
wider than the outside of the tires. Consequently they all end up at
approximately the same width.
So the lengths are all very close and, in the case of a fictional series
like TPTCC, can be made equal simply by playing with splitter length and
rear overhang. For realism the widths should be equalized by stretching or
shrinking the model laterally, or by playing with fender flare dimensions,
just like they would have to do in a real silhouette series. And the height
is irrelevant from a driving standpoint. So the TPTCC situation where we
appear to have models that miss their bounding box by several feet seems to
me to be unnecessary.
"Goy Larsen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
>
> There is also width and height to consider
>
"Haqsau" <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:
Here is a comparo between the stock Corvette and the C5r
Corvette Chassis Specifications
2003 Corvette Coupe 2003 Corvette C5-R
Body Style: Two-door hatchback coupe Two-door hatchback coupe
Drivetrain: Longitudinal front engine, rear-wheel-drive Longitudinal front
engine, rear-wheel-drive
Transmission: 6-speed manual transaxle 6-speed manual transaxle
Chassis: Hydroformed steel chassis, composite body Hydroformed steel
chassis, composite body
Length: 179.7" 182.8"
Width: 73.6" 78.7"
Height: 47.7" 45.8"
Wheelbase: 104.5" 104.7"
Front Track: 61.9" 74.7"
Rear Track: 62.0" 76.1"
Weight: 3,246 lbs. 2,530 lbs.
The racing C5r 'grew' some in length and quite alot in width after it's
first year in competition against the Viper at LeMans.
Quoted text (19 lines)
> An update to the below specs - the March issue of Racer magazine has > an article on the Tran-Am Jag XKR. They list the overall length as > 188.0 in. Not a significant difference from a modelling perspective. > > > "Haqsau" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... >> >> Overall lengths of the production cars that these models are based >> on: >> >> Viper Competition Coupe: 184.1 in. >> Corvette: 179.7 in. >> Mustang: 183.2 in. >> Ford GT: 182.8 >> Jaguar XK: 187.4 >> > >"Art McEwen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<dCN3c.6092$[email hidden]>...
I'm kinda wishing my TPTCC league would switch over to the PWF mod as
I like it alot more and feel its much more polished but they havn't
indicated any desire to do so - I guess for the repainting issues
etc...
Quoted text (14 lines)
> > What's wrong with the newly released PWF mod ? > > > Besides the fact we'd have to rename the league? ;) Nothing as far as I > could tell, it's just that voting went the other way. Maybe people didn't > want to download and re-paint? Plus there's no GT40 ;) > > The initial driving position in PWF was a bit low in the car, making it hard > to see some of the apexes, but they quickly fixed that. For me the cars > actually felt better then TPTCC as I thought there was more of a gradual > progression from grip to no-grip, but I've been told I was imagining that. > I also swapped wheel/pedals so maybe thats where the difference was. > > mcewena >Dave, your data just shows that the C5R is even closer to the length of the
others than I thought. Doesn't change my point at all, in fact it
reinforces it.
As far as widths go you can't compare the C5R and Competition Coupe directly
because they are not built to the same set of rules. The Competition Coupe
was built for the Viper Challenge and for Grand Am. It was never intended
to be run in ALMS or Trans-Am and in as-delivered form would not even be
legal in those series.
"Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted text (23 lines)
> > Here is a comparo between the stock Corvette and the C5r > Corvette Chassis Specifications > > 2003 Corvette Coupe 2003 Corvette C5-R > Body Style: Two-door hatchback coupe Two-door hatchback coupe > Drivetrain: Longitudinal front engine, rear-wheel-drive Longitudinal front > engine, rear-wheel-drive > Transmission: 6-speed manual transaxle 6-speed manual transaxle > Chassis: Hydroformed steel chassis, composite body Hydroformed steel > chassis, composite body > Length: 179.7" 182.8" > Width: 73.6" 78.7" > Height: 47.7" 45.8" > Wheelbase: 104.5" 104.7" > Front Track: 61.9" 74.7" > Rear Track: 62.0" 76.1" > Weight: 3,246 lbs. 2,530 lbs. > > > The racing C5r 'grew' some in length and quite alot in width after it's > first year in competition against the Viper at LeMans. >"Haqsau" <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:
> Dave, your data just shows that the C5R is even closer to the length
> of the others than I thought. Doesn't change my point at all, in fact
> it reinforces it.
>
> As far as widths go you can't compare the C5R and Competition Coupe
> directly because they are not built to the same set of rules.
hehe For years I claimed the C5r was not legal for FIA events. Jde can
fill you in how I always felt the bowtie car was more GT than GTS. :)
> The
> Competition Coupe was built for the Viper Challenge and for Grand Am.
> It was never intended to be run in ALMS or Trans-Am and in
> as-delivered form would not even be legal in those series.
>
Yeah, I was suprised to see it join the Speed Challenge halfway through
last year. I thought it was going to be club racing only the first year.,
I have been looking like mad for dimensions on the racing Mustang. I could
find info on the Jag even the Qvale, but dangit...I can't seem to find any
thing that tells me if the 'Stang is shorter.
I do know that one of the league members found that flipping a TPTCC car
on it's roof looks in replay like an upsidedown hovercraft. Due to the
damage bubble the painted roof never made contact with the ground.
That is one of the items being looked at. They went after the lod's first
to help the fps challenged users. Damage and tweeking will be worked on
some more I think.
I have used the TPTCC mod since it's first Beta (In the TPTCC league of
course). Not once have I run into an issue with the visual representation of
the car being different then the collision box. And I have run close (very
close) to numerous others in the league. and I'd have to say the comment
"models that miss their bounding box by several feet " is just a tad
exaggerated. Just drive better :)
I personally prefer the more correct visuals of the car then the cartoonish
squished and squashed and flared, and stretched cars in the PWF mod. And I
like both mods and race using both mods.
And... dont forget that TPTCC mod is not yet a complete mod and Im sure it
will be "just as polished" as the PWF mod when completed.
"Haqsau" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> Not sure why height would be important. Sure if you want the collisionsto
> look accurate when you are upside down I guess that might be important but
> my concern has to do with being able to run in traffic without bumpingeach
> other.
>
> Concerning width, in most sedan racing series the cars are all going to be
> the same width, regardless of the width of the different productionbodies.
> The regulations stipulate the tire size and the maximum track, everybody
> wants to run the maximum tire and track, and nobody wants the body to beany
> wider than the outside of the tires. Consequently they all end up at
> approximately the same width.
>
> So the lengths are all very close and, in the case of a fictional series
> like TPTCC, can be made equal simply by playing with splitter length and
> rear overhang. For realism the widths should be equalized by stretchingor
> shrinking the model laterally, or by playing with fender flare dimensions,
> just like they would have to do in a real silhouette series. And theheight
> is irrelevant from a driving standpoint. So the TPTCC situation where we
> appear to have models that miss their bounding box by several feet seemsto
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.624 / Virus Database: 401 - Release Date: 3/15/2004
