Cars Ford Transit 2005 (WIP)
- Thread starter garyjpaterson
- Start date
Haha, the thought has crossed my mind. I don't know if you've seen the 'BeamNG Drive', but it'd be certainly possible in that game!
I believe the collider mesh needs to be convex, so anything "inside" wouldn't work. But definately worth a try 
I believe the collider mesh needs to be convex, so anything "inside" wouldn't work. But definately worth a try
What if the collider were large enough to encompasses the perimeter of the van but shallow so it does not extend to the full height? If it were then set to be the height of the floor of the van you should be able to drive/park on it.
They were FWD. They were also RWD. A few were even 4WD
Yeah it was one of the reasonably unique things about he mk6/7 Transit; you could specify FWD or RWD, depending on engine choice etc.
The 2.4's were all RWD, and of course this is the most powerful version (135/140bhp). You don't see many RWD SWB Transits, most are FWD as the load bay is larger and lower.
Also, kind of interesting; I checked the MOT history of this specific Transit (the one that actually went round the 'Ring), and its just recently passed another MOT at 75k Miles, legal for another year!
As you can see it´s still W.I.P. (Work in progress) so there won´t be any link.Hi, is there any way i could download an early version? Thanks.
Hi, is there any way i could download an early version? Thanks.
Beta downloads are available for those willing+capable of improving the quality of the mod. So if you have well documented experience of modding (physics stuff) then by all means let me know, I'm always open to help
Otherwise you'll have to wait like everyone else
PS. I really am looking for some physics help for the S2 and S3 versions. Both are just lacking in terms of driveability, and I have no experience tuning powerful race cars. Let me know if you can help
well, im none of those things, so i'll just be waiting. Looks very good already!Beta downloads are available for those willing+capable of improving the quality of the mod. So if you have well documented experience of modding (physics stuff) then by all means let me know, I'm always open to help
Otherwise you'll have to wait like everyone else
PS. I really am looking for some physics help for the S2 and S3 versions. Both are just lacking in terms of driveability, and I have no experience tuning powerful race cars. Let me know if you can help
Yes, I'm working on this again!
Went back the the Transit files today wanting to push on with new bits, but ended up spending all my time bringing it up the same standards as the Anglia; Might be hard to see, but these two images who the before and after of todays work, mainly getting rid of my old attempts at 'chamfers' which look crap and dont blend in, and general refinements. Its slow work, and there's a lot more to go, but I think its worth it, looks much nicer IMO.
I guess its on of those things people probably wouldn't notice, but I most certainly do!
Click to see full size, you won't see anything otherwise.
Before:
After:
Went back the the Transit files today wanting to push on with new bits, but ended up spending all my time bringing it up the same standards as the Anglia; Might be hard to see, but these two images who the before and after of todays work, mainly getting rid of my old attempts at 'chamfers' which look crap and dont blend in, and general refinements. Its slow work, and there's a lot more to go, but I think its worth it, looks much nicer IMO.
I guess its on of those things people probably wouldn't notice, but I most certainly do!
Click to see full size, you won't see anything otherwise.
Before:
After:
Wow, thats a lot smoother. Great work. We need this car for the RIng. hehe
Got the mirrors working, pretty difficult due to the way AC does mirrors, which is really intended to work with landscape shaped mirrors, but I think they do a decent enough job.
I'll be quite honest and say I'm not sure what you mean!
Chamfers are just done normally with 3dsmax, with all faces given the same smoothing group, like below:
I could (and did before) do chamfers like this, which would use less polys - but you either don't get a rounded smooth look, or you end up adding loops at each side which ends up using more polys in the end.
Ah yes, the top is how I'd usually do them.
You can select an edge and do 'extrude edges' but have no extrusion, but it'll extrude edge support loops... rather than the 'classical' chamfer which does the bottom one.
But the top one is technically no more accurate, just the normals are nicer because of the support loops.
In theory you can make the bottom one look more like the top one by using face weighted normals, or setting normals explicitly.
If you check out the polycount forums, and more specifically the wiki here:
http://wiki.polycount.com/wiki/Face_weighted_normals
It discusses some approaches to managing the normals.
I use the script here:
http://wiki.polycount.com/wiki/VertexNormal#SetNormals_MAXScript
"GetVertNormalsFromFace MAXScript"
You just select bunches of faces that you want to have normals 'conventionally' calculated across, and then run the script, which runs face weighted normal calcs over them.
So for instance you'd select the forward faces of the actual bodywork and press the button, then you'd select the faces that are perpendicular to them (beyond the chamfer) and press the button.
This leaves the normals all either facing outwards of the body panel, or perpendicular to it... the chamfered edge then gets a blend of normals from out, to perpendicular (as per the diagrams on the wiki pages linked above)
That is technically more accurate of the actual topology, looks just as good as the method you've now chosen, AND it saves triangles too.
Just be cautious with using modifiers like edit mesh or symmetry above edited normals because they can be lost in some cases!
I'll be honest I used your 'new' method in the past because it works ok and looks ok and that's great.
I'm just letting you know that this method works nicely too, and in theory offers many advantages in areas like UV unwrapping, lower tri and vert counts, etc.
Keep up the amazing work though
99% of any project is making the main mesh. These are details and are just thinks to pontificate about later... don't worry about them too much
You can select an edge and do 'extrude edges' but have no extrusion, but it'll extrude edge support loops... rather than the 'classical' chamfer which does the bottom one.
But the top one is technically no more accurate, just the normals are nicer because of the support loops.
In theory you can make the bottom one look more like the top one by using face weighted normals, or setting normals explicitly.
If you check out the polycount forums, and more specifically the wiki here:
http://wiki.polycount.com/wiki/Face_weighted_normals
It discusses some approaches to managing the normals.
I use the script here:
http://wiki.polycount.com/wiki/VertexNormal#SetNormals_MAXScript
"GetVertNormalsFromFace MAXScript"
You just select bunches of faces that you want to have normals 'conventionally' calculated across, and then run the script, which runs face weighted normal calcs over them.
So for instance you'd select the forward faces of the actual bodywork and press the button, then you'd select the faces that are perpendicular to them (beyond the chamfer) and press the button.
This leaves the normals all either facing outwards of the body panel, or perpendicular to it... the chamfered edge then gets a blend of normals from out, to perpendicular (as per the diagrams on the wiki pages linked above)
That is technically more accurate of the actual topology, looks just as good as the method you've now chosen, AND it saves triangles too.
Just be cautious with using modifiers like edit mesh or symmetry above edited normals because they can be lost in some cases!
I'll be honest I used your 'new' method in the past because it works ok and looks ok and that's great.
I'm just letting you know that this method works nicely too, and in theory offers many advantages in areas like UV unwrapping, lower tri and vert counts, etc.
Keep up the amazing work though
99% of any project is making the main mesh. These are details and are just thinks to pontificate about later... don't worry about them too much
It's still being build/developed as far as I know.
