UKAC Race next week - you choose

[picnic]

Typical - race day as well.

Mind you some tasty stuff in there! Reverse grids anyone?

[Linus27]

I was going to suggest that for next weeks track day race. Will post details after I have done more testing tonight.

[Eck Simpson]

http://www.assettocorsa.net/forum/index.php?threads/assetto-corsa-v1-13-update-available.43929/

You finished updating yet Pete... 

[picnic]

I've updated the server but it was only a 158MB update which doesn't seem big enough. Was there no new car/track content? I was expecting the Mazda's etc.

[Mark J]

Ooh RSR and 787 

[FullMetalGasket]

I've bearly managed to drive the 787. Sitting in the pits and listening to it is too enjoyable 

Mk1 MX5 could be a hoot as a one make race somewhere twisty, not sure there's much else slow enough to race with it...

[Linus27]

Done some testing and come up with the following fun races.

Event 1: Tight twisty circuit with a long back straight so a bit David vs Goliath at times.

Track:
Magione

Cars:
Cayman S
BMW M4
Exige 240R
Boxster S
Boxster S PDK
Lotus Evora S

Rules:
40 minute race

Event 2: Spec race on familiar circuit

Track:
Brands Hatch GP

Cars:
Praga

Rules:
2 x 20 minute race with race 2 being reverse grid

Event 3: TBC

[Mark J]

Wonder how the 962 v c9 x 787 stack up BoP wise  . Maybe add a bit of performance ballast to even them up and we have a potential group C series 

[FullMetalGasket]

962SH and the C9 are pretty similar - 962LH is quicker at loony fast tracks but slower/much harder at shorter twisty ones.
Currently my Spa laptimes are well under the 962's and C9 but I haven't really made any start on the setup yet and the AI Mazda's are actually far faster than AI pork and mercs....

[Stefan aka Postal]

Aris has an explenation about the 787 on the official website. This is a part of it:


The history of this car and its performance is not so easy to judge out of simple laptimes on websites.
First of all, at the Suzuka the C9 was running the sprint version and the 962 is the short tail and MUCH more evolved than the one we have now in AC (ST is 1986). The C9 sprint has almost double the downforce of the C9 LeMans version of AC. The 962 ST of 1990 has more downforce and less drag and much better tyres than AC 1986 version.
On top of that, Mazda's team principal of the era was notoriously famous of ordering the cars to never push in qualify and during the race. For them, the most important thing was to finish the race, then look at the position.

It makes sense as the car didn't had a turbocharged engine and so couldn't raise the boost to get extra power, and didn't had the big engine of the Jaguars with plenty of torque from low revs. On top of that, it had even less total downforce because it was shorter and thus had a smaller diffuser area in total, in comparison to the other cars. Japan engineers thought the increased agility from the lower CoG and lighter mechanical parts, would give better tyre wear which linked to the lower fuel consumption could make them more competitive.

The only time Mazda's team principal ordered a full attack was for just one car at the LeMans race of 1991.
They knew it was probably the last time they could compete officially before either Mazda management would kill the project, or LeMans authorities would withdrew the rules handicap in favour of the wankel engine, so they went all in. Amazingly enough, even though the car couldn't exactly match the pace of the Mercedes, they could stay ahead of the Jaguars and the rest of the pack, by matching the performance and/or running less pit stops than their adversaries. When the Mercedes started failing, the Mazda reliability gave them the once in a life time opportunity and they got it.

So all in all, the 1991 787B Mazda against the LeMans Mercedes and Jaguars had:
- a top speed deficit,
- a power deficit (especially in torque and delivery)
- a slight downforce advantage (they run the same floor and slight modifications on the wings, so it wasn't that much different than the sprint version)
- a good fuel consumption and tyre wear advantage.

On the other hand against the sprint versions of the opponents, they were hopeless!
So it makes sense that the 1991 Mazda 787B, is tiny bit faster at Monza, than a Mercedes C9 LM version of 1989 driven at race boost, and the 1986 version of 962ST.
It would be slower (2-3 secs at LeMans qualify lap) from a 1991 Mercedes C9LM or C11 from 1991 and slightly slower (1sec) from a 1991 962 which by the time was running heavily modified short tails even at leman (client cars)
It will be hopeless against a 1991 C9 sprint version or even worse a C11 sprint version and a 962 ST of 1991, simply eaten alive.

[Eck Simpson]

AC updated again...

http://www.assettocorsa.net/forum/index.php?threads/assetto-corsa-v1-13-update-available.43929/#post-856671

[FullMetalGasket]

Still got work to do as I'm not happy with it in medium speed corners, but down to a high 2:15 now on mediums at Spa (For reference the Long tail and C9 are mid 2:14's for me - C9 was an older build of AC though and felt quicker last time I drive it - probably comparable to the short tail (2:13's) now in race pace).
I'm already good for at least another .5 off that 2:15 time at present due to mistakes. Add a better setup into the mix and it'll be up there with the other cars in lap pace 

Will repeat the experiment at Brands or somewhere similarly twisty to see what we get.

[Maikel K.]

http://www.f1simgames.com/assetto-corsa-1998-championship-track-pack/
Seems like a good collection of older tracks which might suit the group C cars abit better. Haven't tested them myself though  

(Tracks are from 1988 even though the link adress says 1998  )

[Mark J]

Nice find Maikel, be interesting to see what quality they are but yes would suit a group c series nicely 

[FullMetalGasket]

Group C without the Nordschlief would be like apple pie without custard...

Just saying like