What determines the mid engine adder?

[ekim952522000]

Keep in mind all the cars in this simulation were RWD.

[Chip42]

Keep in mind all the cars in this simulation were RWD.

probably for a new topic, but would you care to run 120/150/200 hp cars with the weight split 60/40 through 35/65 RWD and 70/30 through 60/40 FWD? Obviously a front-heavy RWD car would have a few traction issues thus influencing the results.

nothing but a sanity check.

[ekim952522000]

probably for a new topic, but would you care to run 120/150/200 hp cars with the weight split 60/40 through 35/65 RWD and 70/30 through 60/40 FWD? Obviously a front-heavy RWD car would have a few traction issues thus influencing the results.

nothing but a sanity check.

I did run some FWD weight balance numbers in this thread
https://improvedtouring.com...t=25407&page=9

Post #174 It is not the same car or track but should answer your questions.

[Chip42]

thanks mike - I knew I'd seen that before.

as a matter of lap time % difference from "ideal" 50/50, given what mike has posted now and in the past (with all of the caveats that go with it):

layout, weight\hp 150hp 200hp
FR 50/50 0% 0%
MR 40/60 -0.082% -1.35%
FWD 65/35 +1.13% +1.40%

so it appears the effect IS roughly simillar, though mid-rear engined is simulated as slightly less beneficial than FWD is detrimental. I think we tweaking of the parameters, this could be minimized on either front.

the ITR rule might need to be rethought, but the 50 lbs is likely adequate and fair given the above.

[tderonne]

Neat results with LapSim. I haven't used it. Does it assume some nominal wheel rate or something such that the "setup" changes the weight distribution? What does it use for grip/tires? More weight is going to need more tire, but we're limited by rim width. A 50:50 car has an advantage there.

And no has mentioned the Fiero. Which is an ITA car now. I think weight was added in it's transition from ITS. Are these 50 pounds in there? Or did the ITA classification come before the new process?