Cars Authentic Handling Tires for the Chinook Mk.2 Can-Am Mod [Deleted]

[A Casual Sim Racer]

A Casual Sim Racer submitted a new resource:

Improved Tires for Chinook Mk.2 Can-Am - An improved set of tires for the Chinook Mk.2 Can-Am mod by Stereo

I found a disconnect with the Chinook Mk2's tires when I was driving it. It is true that mid to late 1960s racing tires didn't provide that much traction, but they did allow drivers to push the cars to their limits. I initially thought my struggles after several hours of driving were just because I needed to still come to grips with the car, but then I decided to jump into the other Can Am cars to remember how they felt, like the Lola Mk2, and that is when I decided to see if I could make...

Read more about this resource...

 

[iwn]

Installation? Just drop and forget?

 

[A Casual Sim Racer]

Installation? Just drop and forget?

INSTALLATION:
1. Select the Chinook Mk.2 in Content Manager ("Content" page, then "Cars" page, then select "Chinook Mk.2 Can-Am")
2. At the bottom of Content Manager select "Unpack Data", this will pull up the unpacked data files. Leave that file open.
3. Now open the file you downloaded with the new tires, click inside till you open the "data" folder and you will see all the tire files.
4. Copy and paste those tire files to the Chinook Mk.2's "data" folder, and allow it to replace the 5 files it is overwriting.
5. Now go to the main folder for the Chinook Mk.2 and delete the blue compressed "data" file.
INSTALLATION COMPLETE

 

[iwn]

Thanks. Quite snappy car, hope this makes it better.

 

[A Casual Sim Racer]

Thanks. Quite snappy car, hope this makes it better.

Have you driven the Lola T70 Mk.2 by Afidgod? https://www.racedepartment.com/downloads/lola-t70-mkii-spyder-rf2.16043/ It makes it handle more like that car does on the limit, which I personally love. Just because a car is a classic doesn't mean it was impossible to drive. In fact if you watch videos of the Can Am racers they had the trust to throw their cars through the corners.

 

[iwn]

Yes, and the M1.

 

[mclarenf1papa]

Ignore the legend in the bottom right. Your "improved" slip curve is the red, mine are the dotted (lateral) and solid blue lines (longitudinal).

 

[A Casual Sim Racer]

View attachment 535726
Ignore the legend in the bottom right. Your "improved" slip curve is the red, mine are the dotted (lateral) and solid blue lines (longitudinal).

My tires are more aggressive at initial dropoff and less sensitive to lockups, thus fitting in better with the existing Can Am mods that exist. I'm not surprised you decided to post a bunch about how you disagree with my tires, as you have always commented negatively on anything I have done in the modding community. Ultimately I don't agree with your approach and you don't agree with mine, so it doesn't surprise me then at all that we have a different approach to tires within the Assetto Corsa physics engine. I didn't know you were responsible for the Chinook Mk.2's tires, but it makes sense now. I don't wish to supplant any of your work, I just prefer the ones I created.

I think giving people options is the best thing about the modding community. Some people will certainly think my optional new tires are stupid, just like you do, and others will think they are great and bring them a lot more enjoyment of the mod. Either way the community benefits.

 

[mclarenf1papa]

My tires are more aggressive at initial dropoff and less sensitive to lockups, thus fitting in better with the existing Can Am mods that exist.

Sure, and less quantitatively realistic, so to call them "improved" is quite audacious and arrogant.

And I've not always been negative about the things you've done, I've only ever even commented on your general approach to physics modeling and you placing the blame on the physics engine when it was in reality your fault.

 

[A Casual Sim Racer]

Sure, and less quantitatively realistic, so to call them "improved" is quite audacious and arrogant.

And I've not always been negative about the things you've done, I've only ever even commented on your general approach to physics modeling and you placing the blame on the physics engine when it was in reality your fault.

And once again we disagree, you think Assetto Corsa's physics engine has few flaws, while I at least recognize that it has many but then work around those flaws. Thus I take a more holistic approach which focuses on the results, which I view as an improvement over your approach. You lean into the quantitative aspects of the physics engine more then I think is wise, and call other approaches "audacious and arrogant" if they view themselves as an improvement. In the end I think the results matter more then the method.

 

[mclarenf1papa]

And once again we disagree, you think Assetto Corsa's physics engine has few flaws, while I at least recognize that it has many but then work around those flaws. Thus I take a more holistic approach which focuses on the results, which I view as an improvement over your approach. You lean into the physics engine more then I think is wise, and call other approaches "audacious and arrogant" if they view themselves as an improvement.

I've rewritten or revamped almost the entirety of the physics engine via the CSP (which this car takes advantage of) and know what quite literally every possible parameter in the AC physics files does, as well as the math/code behind it. The only person that knows the engine better (or might...been a few years now) is Stefano, who was the one that wrote it. So to say I lean into it unwisely is frankly hilarious.

I additionally work in professional motorsport providing simulation engineering services to top level racing teams on multimillion dollar budgets; I know quite well how hard to lean into the engine.

Again, not saying the car or tires are perfect, because they were only a moderate effort on both Stereo and my parts, but yes, it is absolutely audacious and arrogant to call it an improvement on the basis of "I like it more."

 

[A Casual Sim Racer]

I've rewritten or revamped almost the entirety of the physics engine via the CSP (which this car takes advantage of) and know what quite literally every possible parameter in the AC physics files does, as well as the math/code behind it. The only person that knows the engine better (or might...been a few years now) is Stefano, who was the one that wrote it. So to say I lean into it unwisely is frankly hilarious.

I additionally work in professional motorsport providing simulation engineering services to top level racing teams on multimillion dollar budgets; I know quite well how hard to lean into the engine.

Again, not saying the car or tires are perfect, because they were only a moderate effort on both Stereo and my parts, but yes, it is absolutely audacious and arrogant to call it an improvement on the basis of "I like it more."

Good for you. I see why you have such a big head and go around criticizing everyone else's work like you know better. Talk about audacious and arrogant....

And yes, I think the "I like it more" or the "it feels more realistic" or "it feels like it fits in better with other mods" approach has its place and in many cases it is the better way, while you clearly do not. I start with the end goal in mind. First, I watch film, then if possible I drive the actual car or as similar a car that I can find, and finally I begin to work backwards from the intended result. I craft the code to fit the result I want, being I want it to feel realistic and accurate. I could care less about the numbers that it takes to get that realism and great driving experience.

But like I said before, I think giving people options is the best thing about the modding community. Some people will certainly think my approach to physics is stupid, just like you do, and others will think it is great as it brings them a lot more enjoyment of the mod. Either way the community benefits.

 

[mclarenf1papa]

Good for you. I see why you have such a big head and go around criticizing everyone else's work like you know better. Talk about audacious and arrogant....

And yes, I think the "I like it more" or the "it feels more realistic" or "it feels like it fits in better with other mods" approach has its place and in many cases it is the better way, while you clearly do not. I start with the end goal in mind. First, I watch film, then if possible I drive the actual car or as similar a car that I can find, and finally I begin to work backwards from the intended result. I craft the code to fit the result I want, being I want it to feel realistic and accurate. I could care less about the numbers that it takes to get that realism and great driving experience.

But like I said before, I think giving people options is the best thing about the modding community. Some people will certainly think my approach to physics is stupid, just like you do, and others will think it is great as it brings them a lot more enjoyment of the mod. Either way the community benefits.

It's one thing to condemn someone's actions or work, another to condemn their character. I will leave the ad hominem to you.

The problem with the "end goal" approach is that it's very easy to go down the wrong path. Take the Chinook, for example. I've just put its tires on the Lola and adjusted overall grip to match the original tires (Jason's Lola tires are ~5% grippier than the Chinook tires - for anyone trying this, you also need to enable extended physics for the car), and they feel both more like bias ply tires and more forgiving in low slip oversteer scenarios. They are very drivable tires and they are referenced from real data (again, to an extent; no shame in admitting I would revise at least the rear optimal slip angle). I think a large part of the difference you feel is the lack of grip on those tires vs. the Lola's, not them being much more sensitive to slip, because as I showed a few posts ago, they really aren't.

The Lola was outright the best Can-Am car of its period, and the Chinook was someone's shed remake of an M1b. The Chinook shouldn't drive the same or likely even similarly to the Lola, and it's not particularly likely that it would drive as predictably or nicely (even if slower) either. To that end, it's quite hard to approximate how the car "should" behave, and it's thus better for the realism standpoint to work forwards rather than backwards.

So we come to the point of realism vs. the enjoyment of a game. Your approach lends itself to the latter, using an artistic approach to represent a vehicle in the way you want to see it. The "simulation approach" does not do that. I'm not saying that either is better or worse for something like a public mod, but again, to plaster the word "improvement" over one or the other is certainly not polite nor provable.

 

[KittX]

gotta chime in to the discussion with my 2 couple of cents: i think the alternative sets of tyres or physics tweaks that more or less balance the different mod cars of the same class - have their place to be, and it absolutely makes sense to have them as separate mods (or mod extensions). But the file description should reflect that very fact and purpose, i.e. something like "balance pack, or bop twekas" but not the improvement, which as we see here is very subjective. To me for example the Lola tires are indeed a tad too grippy.

 

[A Casual Sim Racer]

gotta chime in to the discussion with my 2 couple of cents: i think the alternative sets of tyres or physics tweaks that more or less balance the different mod cars of the same class - have their place to be, and it absolutely makes sense to have them as separate mods (or mod extensions). But the file description should reflect that very fact and purpose, i.e. something like "balance pack, or bop twekas" but not the improvement, which as we see here is very subjective. To me for example the Lola tires are indeed a tad too grippy.

You make a solid point, hmm...

I shall change the name of the mod! Perhaps everyone will love them then, haha!

 

[aphidgod]

gotta chime in to the discussion with my 2 couple of cents: i think the alternative sets of tyres or physics tweaks that more or less balance the different mod cars of the same class - have their place to be, and it absolutely makes sense to have them as separate mods (or mod extensions). But the file description should reflect that very fact and purpose, i.e. something like "balance pack, or bop twekas" but not the improvement, which as we see here is very subjective. To me for example the Lola tires are indeed a tad too grippy.

FWIW the Lola is barely able to match RL lap times from the period on the current tires. I have decent aero data, good mass data and fairly representative power data, so scaling the tires to lap time isn't "pure science" but is also far from "pure speculation."

@Andy-R was able to get within a couple tenths of John Surtees' 1966 laps at Silverstone when we did (extensive) testing. If I had to make a change, I'd probably add ~1% grip.

My sensitivity curves are probably a little generous but overall grip level is probably fairly close. The T70 was real good. Respect it.

 

[Trava]

So to sum up: you took tyres from the Lola without permission, changed few parameters around on the basis of "my ass" and called them "improved" and then said JPG is the arrogant one?

Maybe you really should stop posting here like you said you will do a while ago.

 

[mclarenf1papa]

Also worth noting the Chinook's rear tires are 51mm skinnier than the Lola's , so plagiarizing the Lola tires wouldn't really make sense. (Unless like Kitt said, they were BoP tires or something)

 

[A Casual Sim Racer]

So to sum up: you took tyres from the Lola without permission, changed few parameters around on the basis of "my ass" and called them "improved" and then said JPG is the arrogant one?

Maybe you really should stop posting here like you said you will do a while ago.

I said I'd stop posting in the "What I'm Working on Thread" because I freaking can't stand much of Racedepartment's toxic modding community. I never said I'd stop posting on Racedepartment. I have my own thread on here and plenty of people who support my work.... But I guess haters got to hate...

Oh, and I'm not going anywhere so I look forward to your negative remarks going forward, haha!

 

[A Casual Sim Racer]

FWIW the Lola is barely able to match RL lap times from the period on the current tires. I have decent aero data, good mass data and fairly representative power data, so scaling the tires to lap time isn't "pure science" but is also far from "pure speculation."

@Andy-R was able to get within a couple tenths of John Surtees' 1966 laps at Silverstone when we did (extensive) testing. If I had to make a change, I'd probably add ~1% grip.

My sensitivity curves are probably a little generous but overall grip level is probably fairly close. The T70 was real good. Respect it.

It is hands down my favorite car ever made for Assetto Corsa. I love that thing!